daniel p wrote:oh, I hadn't even thought of the discs as being region locked - this will be a massive shame, as I am in a mojority of excited (for CC Blu) non region a'ers!
For those who haven't bought a player yet, I'll re-iterate my advice elsewhere to get a HTPC (or modify your existing PC. If it's sufficiently high end already, the modifications might prove cheaper than a stand-alone player)
If you insist on buying a stand-alone player, think about getting a Region A. How many Region B or C titles are you really likely to get?
With HDDVD, I ended up buying a majority of my disks from America anyway just because the Australian ones were so expensive.
hey darth,
yeah, I would insist on buying a stand alone player rather than a PC rig, I just prefer that kind of setup, for my house anyway.
I would not have a clue as to how I could import a region A player though... can anyone give me some pointers?
that is, assuming at least some of the criterion Blu's will be region A... and yeah, I would say about 20 of my 35 Blu-Rays discs are from region A already (region free discs though of course).
thanks for your reply tho david - I would prefer to get a standalone player for region A, but at that price, this might be the way to go. once I muster up some spare $$
back on topic - here's hoping we get an announcement soon, and I am eager to see what they will do with the packaging.
to anybody who has The Seventh Seal, Black Narcissus and Great Expectations - do you see any possibility of criterion even bettering the transfers?
these are not really Criterion standards (altough I was a fan of Prison Break until the abysall season 3...) but perhaps a good pression or persuasion over the Criterion team is something to do...
Rupert Pupkin wrote: perhaps a good pression or persuasion over the Criterion team is something to do...
See my comment above. Do you really think Criterion don't know that they'll increase their market by making their Blu-Rays region-free? And don't you think they're just as frustrated by contractually-enforced region coding as the rest of us?
So the kind of "pression or persuasion" you're talking about will achieve nothing aside from stating what to them is already obvious, with all the potential for extreme irritation that that implies.
The only people with any power to influence region coding decisions are the primary rightsholders, not independent distributors like Criterion. In fact, does Criterion actually own any films outright at all?
MichaelB wrote:The only people with any power to influence region coding decisions are the primary rightsholders, not independent distributors like Criterion.
I disagree.
A radical new approach would be for licencees from different territories to make the case to licensors that they all wanted a level, region-free, playing field. That way, the licensor would listen. The only reason the licensor stipulates region coding is to "protect" all the various licencees in different territories. If those licencees told the licensors that they did not give a fuck about regions, then regions would not be imposed.
Great things could be achieved here with communication.
In fact, does Criterion actually own any films outright at all
peerpee wrote:A radical new approach would be for licencees from different territories to make the case to licensors that they all wanted a level, region-free, playing field. That way, the licensor would listen. The only reason the licensor stipulates region coding is to "protect" all the various licencees in different territories. If those licencees told the licensors that they did not give a fuck about regions, then regions would not be imposed.
But, just to play devil's advocate, what happens if the rightsholder is also distributing the film in one or more territories and wishes to prevent licensees from encroaching on "their" markets?
MichaelB wrote:But, just to play devil's advocate, what happens if the rightsholder is also distributing the film in one or more territories and wishes to prevent licensees from encroaching on "their" markets?
Good point! -- In an ideal world, no licencee would entertain region coding, and thus the film would go unissued in other territories
Without that meaning to sound flippant, MoC will be pursuing exactly this ideal for Blu-ray.
MichaelB wrote:But, just to play devil's advocate, what happens if the rightsholder is also distributing the film in one or more territories and wishes to prevent licensees from encroaching on "their" markets?
Good point! -- In an ideal world, no licencee would entertain region coding, and thus the film would go unissued in other territories
Without that meaning to sound flippant, MoC will be pursuing exactly this ideal for Blu-ray.
That sounds difficult IMHO... SD-DVD achieved the happy compromise - region coding but machinery with software that easily be recoded to play anything... Everyone could live with that contradiction easily... Unless say IRL/UK customers can play a range of Blu-Ray discs from around the world (especially CC) where's the incentive with a move there?... BluRay have scored an own goal... Perhaps because Sony own both the hardware (players) and software (content) they thought they could exert a vice like grip on everything...... Despite debatable improvements in picture, they are actually trying to turn the clock back from the immensely liberating experience DVD has been... Nick is right about region coding - needs a new freedom front - in actuality making MoC discs region free will boost sales from North America, but won't help us UK/IRL cinephiles, who won't be able to access the reverse supply of US RA/R1 discs....
peerpee wrote:A radical new approach would be for licencees from different territories to make the case to licensors that they all wanted a level, region-free, playing field. That way, the licensor would listen. The only reason the licensor stipulates region coding is to "protect" all the various licencees in different territories. If those licencees told the licensors that they did not give a fuck about regions, then regions would not be imposed.
That's an excellent idea, but I wonder about Japanese licensors. As I understand it, they do not want a level playing field, because that would prevent them being able to charge such exorbitant prices in Japan.
Same goes for, say, Facets, who I'm sure would prefer not to compete with AE on a level playing field.
I made this post in the Playtime thread, but I will repeat it here:
I'd like to recommend politely that we limit speculation of Blu-ray releases to the Criterion Blu-ray thread. Otherwise, we will shortly have 364 (and rising) threads each with a post saying "What are the odds this will show up on Blu-ray?"
Once a title is announced in the Blu-ray format, though, there's no reason not to discuss it in the same thread as the DVD release.
Damn, at 2 a month, it will take a year for them to release all the Blu-Ray releases they stated earlier. Looks like it is going to be an extremely slow process.
peerpee wrote:A radical new approach would be for licencees from different territories to make the case to licensors that they all wanted a level, region-free, playing field. That way, the licensor would listen. The only reason the licensor stipulates region coding is to "protect" all the various licencees in different territories. If those licencees told the licensors that they did not give a fuck about regions, then regions would not be imposed.
That's an excellent idea, but I wonder about Japanese licensors. As I understand it, they do not want a level playing field, because that would prevent them being able to charge such exorbitant prices in Japan.
Same goes for, say, Facets, who I'm sure would prefer not to compete with AE on a level playing field.
Why would any licensor agree to that if they have the possibility of making more money by licensing the film to each territory separately. No region would mean one release for the world, and only one license to sell. Multiple regions mean many licenses to sell = more money. Even if you charge more for the World license, it won't be as much as multiple region sales.
Chungking Express, The Third Man and The Man Who Fell To Earth as of this moment.
Since I'm not technical what does Third Man's "uncompressed mono soundtrack" and Fell To Earth's "uncompressed stereo soundtrack" mean for sound quality?
Last edited by colinr0380 on Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
criterionsnob wrote:Looks like no spine numbers for the Blu-rays.
Surely they'll have the same spine numbers as their SD counterparts. If Criterion is smart they won't look any different either, except probably with a removable blue banner so not to confuse shoppers.
Are all four coming November? That's more than expected, no? Great news, if true. Maybe everything month will bing approximately two new titles, and two old ones in Blu.
colinr0380 wrote:Since I'm not technical what does Third Man's "uncompressed mono soundtrack" and Fell To Earth's "uncompressed stereo soundtrack" mean for sound quality?
It means better sound quality (though the audible difference may be negligible). Like the difference between a high-quality mp3 and a CD.
