Eclipse Discussion and Random Speculation

[kekid]

Am I the only one frustrated by complete lack of action on Eclipse for months now?

[Cinephrenic]

I wonder if they are going by the lunar or solar eclipses to announce these? The next solar and lunar eclipse is in August.

[HerrSchreck]

If CC is listening, and if the E line is experiencing any problems whatsoever, allow this consumer to humbly suggest:

Let go of the box set parameter as a requirement. Free the E line to operate more freely as a CC/Milestone/Kino/Flicker A-like dvd line, able to announce single titles when appropriate, able to announce box sets when appropriate. I think the ability to release individual titles on their own will serve E's mission both aesthetically as well as financially (financially by easing some of the costs for both criterion, as well as the consumer).

I don't think there's anything "wrong" per se with the line the way it's conceived at present... but the flexibility can only help. Perhaps critically so, too.

[kaujot]

Well, I know that for a set like Late Ozu, you're getting each film at roughly $11 (from Criterion's store), but I can't justify spending $55 at a single time, when, at the present moment, I'm only interested in one or two of the films. The ability to buy each film individually OR in a boxset would be really fantastic (though probably a major headache for Criterion).

[Jeff]

The ability to buy each film individually OR in a boxset would be really fantastic (though probably a major headache for Criterion).

It would also likely eliminate some of Criterion's economic rationale for for the Eclipse line. Very few people would be likely to buy something like The Baron of Arizona, for example. This leaves Criterion with a property that they can't effectively market -- an ostensibly worthless acquisition. By including it with better-known Fuller titles though, they're able to unload it on customers who would normally not be interested. I really think the box concept is essential to the Eclipse business model.

I don't think the line is going anywhere either. The recent months without an announcement are likely due (at least in part) to the problems with the Klein set and the headaches and extra work that it must have caused for the Criterion staffers assigned to the Eclipse line. Based on the timing of the newsletter hint and recent blog posting, I would expect a Larisa Shepitko set in August, and Rossellini in September.

[domino harvey]

Jeff's right, if they eliminated the boxed set stipulation, you'd be left with HVe Jr

[kaujot]

A good point.

[HerrSchreck]

No, you'd be left with an arthouse dvd label with smart flexibility, thats all. The line is already Criterion Jr, and thats all HVe used to be anyway.

I think the "economic rationale" is hurting them economically. They may sell the Baron of Arizona, for example, by stuffing it in with Steel Helmet.. but they may also lose sales of I Was Born But (or say Record of a Living Being) by hamstringing it with other titles -- for folks who are, if not "dabblers", a little cash strapped or just not that "director-hardcore", but want a title in there-- some don't want/already have.

The example works both ways, with arguments to and fro making good business sense-- my single point is that they should recognize this very fact, and, without abandoning the box set concept, give themselves the flexibility to do single releases when necc.

Anyhow, I know this was batted around quite a bit once before, with many coming out in favor of it (wasnt one you Jeff coincidentally or am I confusing you w someone else? seriously..)

[Perkins Cobb]

Yes, surely the timing of the Shepitko/Rossellini hint was intended to reassure the doomsayers, without coming right out and saying so, that Eclipse isn't toast and that the three-month hiatus is just a production hiccup. Otherwise that was kind of a pointless blog entry.

I'm just a little bummed that we'll probably be getting a string of minor directors or career swaths (Klein, Shepitko, late Rossellini) ahead of the promised Mizoguchi, Naruse, Imamura, Gremillon. Ordinarily I'd cheer for the obscure, but especially since this has turned into the Year of the Reissue on the main line, I find myself craving a steadier stream of comforting Janus canon titles.

[Alphonso]

The example works both ways, with arguments to and fro making good business sense-- my single point is that they should recognize this very fact, and, without abandoning the box set concept, give themselves the flexibility to do single releases when necc.=

Not a bad idea, but awkward if the consumer asks themselves why it's an eclipse release and not a "criterion". Eclipse might have to do some maneuvering with their mission statement. We here know that it takes time to gather the elements together, but it would be unprofessional, even wasteful, if these single releases were later to be criterions. And echoing jeff, key to their concept is selling not individual films but a phase or aspect of someone's career. If they wanted to do unrefined releases like others do, couldn't they simply do it through Image?

Also I will add a recommendation, Teshigahara's color films: Map without a Map, Summer Soldiers, Rikyu, Princess Goh

[mattkc]

I'm just a little bummed that we'll probably be getting a string of minor directors or career swaths (Klein, Shepitko, late Rossellini) ahead of the promised Mizoguchi, Naruse, Imamura, Gremillon.

I agree in general, but late Rossellini is arguably greater than anything that's been released by Criterion/Eclipse in a long time, if not ever. I'm also more excited about these than I would be for early or mid-period Rossellini -- as great as those films are, I prefer the historical films. The Age of the Medici is maybe my favorite Rossellini that I've seen, period. It would be amazing if they could release Acts of the Apostles.

[HerrSchreck]

Not a bad idea, but awkward if the consumer asks themselves why it's an eclipse release and not a "criterion".

People have already been doing that since the beginning of the line. Folks were disappointed coincidentally over the two releases I mentioned in my last post-- Record of a Livng Being by AK, and I Was Born But.. by Ozu. Everyone wants to see their faves get "the treatment". Even with films they'd never seen before and initially accepted as Eclipse... as in Bernard, people see the films and ex-post-facto wish they were CC's so they could get some context via extras on these newly discovered wonders.

Eclipse might have to do some maneuvering with their mission statement. (...) And echoing jeff, key to their concept is selling not individual films but a phase or aspect of someone's career.

Their primary mission statement is: Eclipse is a selection of lost, forgotten, or overshadowed classics in simple, affordable editions. The "cinemateque" thing seemd to be an add-on idea once the idea went public (I may be wrong on this, but the bulk of the leaks concerning E in the years prior to its arrival was that it would operate like Criterions weird little brother.. with Robinson Crusoe on Mars, Equinox, The Holy Mountain, etc, and other lesser known titles. I think the box set idea took everyone by surprise.

Anyhow, I think it'd be a terrible idea to abandon the box-set cinemateque idea. But I think it'd be a great idea to add the single release flexibility.

And putting a release out through Image will not profit them. It's their corporate parent-- the profits flow up, not down... though arrangements could be made I'm sure.

[colinr0380]

It is just on my mind with the recent release of the Artificial Eye discs but could an 'Early Bresson' pairing of Les Anges du péché with the shorter Les Affaires publiques be at all possible?

[HerrSchreck]

Not a bad idea.. a great one actually. Throw in Un Femme Douce (though the "early" idea would be lost) and we'd be cookin with some mighty fine grease. I still have the old NYer vhs of the latter, and wonder if a dvd will ever see the light of day anywhere?

[Tribe]

And putting a release out through Image will not profit them. It's their corporate parent-- the profits flow up, not down... though arrangements could be made I'm sure.

Image isn't the corporate parent of Criterion...just a distributor. A distributor with some influence perhaps, but a separate corporate entity.

Tribe

[HerrSchreck]

And putting a release out through Image will not profit them. It's their corporate parent-- the profits flow up, not down... though arrangements could be made I'm sure.

Image isn't the corporate parent of Criterion...just a distributor. A distributor with some influence perhaps, but a separate corporate entity.

There you go. So that totally takes the idea off the table.

[zedz]

It is just on my mind with the recent release of the Artificial Eye discs but could an 'Early Bresson' pairing of Les Anges du péché with the shorter Les Affaires publiques be at all possible?

I believe Affaires publiques is actively suppressed by Mylene, so it's unlikely. Anyway, that sounds like an excellent Criterion "film plus short" lower-tier release to me.

I see Schreck's point about flexibility. There may be instances where isolated films fall between the gaps of the two lines (no obvious dance partners for Eclipse; not strong enough materials or too uncommercial for a lower-tier Criterion). Eclipse could still handle these if they allow for some randomization of the box concepts, however (e.g. 'First Films', 'Forgotten Treasure Vol 1' - collecting together three pretty much unrelated titles).

I'm not so sure that the 'box' concept is that much of a turn-off for people only interested in a single title. If you're keen to see one silent film by Ozu, would you really be completely uninterested in a second and third? Particularly if they cost about the same as a single-film Criterion release? It's probably swings and roundabouts - I'm sure there are a lot of purchasers who are more likely to pick up a tidy collection of 'risky' films at a low price than the individual titles.

Every time there's a lull in the Eclipse release schedule we start philosophizing about the line's raison d'etre. This at least should be an incentive for Criterion to pull something out of the hat: to shut us up!

[Jeff]

The example works both ways, with arguments to and fro making good business sense-- my single point is that they should recognize this very fact, and, without abandoning the box set concept, give themselves the flexibility to do single releases when necc.

Anyhow, I know this was batted around quite a bit once before, with many coming out in favor of it (wasnt one you Jeff coincidentally or am I confusing you w someone else? seriously..)

Probably. I can't find such a comment by me now, but I say all kinds of crazy shit, and have been known to contradict myself. Anyway, I'm in no way against the idea of Eclipse releasing individual titles. I just don't think it would make sense for them to release titles individually that are also in box sets, as it would ultimately hurt the sales of the boxes.

If, however, there are (as zedz suggests) "orphan titles" that do not make sense for inclusion in any box, and are too obscure, too poorly preserved, or insufficiently supplemented for the main Criterion line, I think they would make fine individual Eclipse titles.

[HerrSchreck]

I must have miscommunicated-- I didn't mean opening up box sets to individual sales... all forthcoming box set releases would stay box sets, all singles would be singles because they make better sense as singles. If they wanted to crack a particular box on their own (like Monterey for Jimi/Otis on CC) that would be great but unexpected.

Some box sets from E are, as z says, the price of a high tier CC; but thats about half so far.. the other five E boxes are, in relation to General DVD Purchase Pricing, higher-priced-- they are the 4/5 title releases. And folks just have to pace themselves with box sets nowadays. With Flicker Alley, Moc, Bfi, Filmmuseum, Kino, AND CC dropping murderously good titles each month, I just cant "do" a box set each month. Many of the titles in some of these boxes just don't make my hair stand up.

Anyhow, that was my two cents. Just wanted to clarify I didn't mean to go back and open up prevoius releases.. I just think for the future they could attract more buyers per-disc if they considered individual release titles, and gave themselves the opportunity for variety and flexibility affiorded by single disc titles, free of the financial weight of a box.

[Awesome Welles]

Well if they didn't want to break the mould of the box set they could bring some pretty great themed double bills/ twin packs at a very affordable price.

[Tommaso]

Eclipse could still handle these if they allow for some randomization of the box concepts, however (e.g. 'First Films', 'Forgotten Treasure Vol 1' - collecting together three pretty much unrelated titles).

I basically cherish this idea, too. But there should be some sort of order to the randomness, nevertheless. I can't see much sense in a box set that would collect together 'first films' of (for example) Rohmer, Antonioni, Pasolini and Melville. Though each of the films in question would be worthy additions, they'd probably cater to totally different audiences. What I could well imagine is something along the lines of Kino's "German Expressionism" box, four unrelated films made by different directors but sharing some qualities of mood and cinematographic style. On the other hand, if I only think of those directors already being released in the main line, there'd be room for at least ten more 'old-style' Eclipse sets before they run out of suitable material. I'd have no problems with another Eclipse set containing Lubitsch silents, for example, or even something like "Very Early Kurosawa" (though I also want Mizoguchi, Gremillon, Sternberg, Rossellini first).

Schreck's idea on single Eclipse releases is great, but perhaps even harder to sell to a wider public. If they kept the slim line cases for these, the 'normal' buyer would start to wonder why there are these 'unattractive' and cheap discs among the normal program in the shops. If they put them into standard cases, people would perhaps be disappointed by the lack of extras and booklets. I mean, any cheapo WB disc of classic films is likely to contain at least some trailer or an additional cartoon or something without being much more expensive (if at all).

So, I don't know what would be best for Eclipse to proceed, and perhaps they actually DON'T have any troubles saleswise. As long as they don't duplicate films already existing on their own in classy editions elsewhere, I can't see why anyone would want to abstain from such a set if they are interested in the director in question. I only abstained from the Kurosawa set for the moment for obvious reasons, and this is perhaps the only set that would have sold better if these films were made available individually, apart from the "Scandal" and "Idiot" discs, of course.

[Morbii]

Not sure if this is the right place for this, but due to the lack of new Eclipse anouncements I emailed and asked about it.

We appreciate your eagerness for new Eclipse series, and if all goes well the next one should be coming out in September.

[Hopscotch]

Not sure if this is the right place for this, but due to the lack of new Eclipse anouncements I emailed and asked about it.

We appreciate your eagerness for new Eclipse series, and if all goes well the next one should be coming out in September.

Damn. The only good part about that news is that now I have time to catch up on Eclipse boxes / a bundle of other DVDs I want but don't have.

[HerrSchreck]

Wow. This line is hiccuping big time.

[movielocke]

damn that probably means that with the rossellini and whats-her-name (russian filmmaker, shapiro?) coming we probably wont' see a mizoguchi set until november at best. personally I'd rather they released one-two eclipse sets per month and only one or two criterion releases. it gets us more variety and I rarely watch extras anymore.