'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.2

[Fierias]

I admit to not knowing the motivations for Criterion only releasing this film in on DVD; I do not know much about the logistics of the market, and they may well have near-proof that a blu would be economically insufficient, or they just couldn't work out something with rights or tranfers or whatever. But, speaking as someone who doesn't love the film (I haven't seen it), it seems to me that the only way to prevent DVD-only releases in the future for films I do love (beside impassioned emails), is by not supporting these types of releases. DVD will only stop being the 'economically more doable' option once people stop buying them as much, right? Laserdisc and VHS were phased out only once DVD started selling more than the former formats, and I imagine it will be the same with blu-ray. I'm aware of the paradox that if you want a better release, you have to show that there is a market for the release by buying the inferior version, and it sucks, but why should anyone antagonize those who take a personal stand and resist buying an edition of a film on a format that is being replaced?

And also, MOC and Criterion are very different, of course, but also very similar in their missions and title selections; Criterion's A Christmas Tale situation, and especially MOC's Une femme mariee quick turn-around are examples of why waiting isn't such a bad thing, especially when you can rent in the meantime. Criterion hasn't been too specific about their upgrade patterns, but at this 'stage' nothing will surprise me.

Edit to add:

Wait if you think you must, but why try to convince anyone else that they are wasting their time/money/whatever if they don't share your opinion? And why be so obnoxious about it (this isn't blu-ray.com)?

give me a break. if you want to put words in my mouth, you could be more subtle at least. I'm not telling anyone to do anything. I'm defending an innocent decision to not buy something that was questioned by two posters who were quite more hostile in their approach than I was.

[Brian C]

...but failing that, the only effective way to lobby for a BD release is to show Criterion that it's a viable moneymaker by putting your money where your mouth is and buying the DVD!

One sees this logic often, and I just don't understand it. What you're saying is, the only way to get a superior product is by first buying an inferior one, just to prove that you really want the superior one.

I call this "the gullible consumer." It's a merchant's dream for consumers to behave this way, because it basically means that they, and not the consumers, get to dictate the marketplace. It implies that consumers ought to buy whatever merchants are willing to give them. By this logic, Criterion should announce all of their titles as DVD-only, since consumers will be flocking to double-dip in the near future anyway. Or taking things further, if you really like a Corolla, but are worried that Toyota's Corollas are dangerous, you should buy one anyway just to prove that the marketplace for a safe Corolla is viable. Because after all, if no one is buying a dangerous Corolla, that must mean that the marketplace isn't viable enough to spend all the money to make them safer!

Now, I don't really have a dog in this particular hunt. I liked the Troell, and would be happy to buy the BD, but I can't say I "loved" it. It's not a vital purchase for me, so the temptation to buy the DVD is nil. I simply have other things that I'll be happy to spend my money on that will provide as much as or more pleasure as this.

But at the same time, consumers really ought to realize that the merchants ought to be begging them to buy their products, not the other way around. And especially in this case - since we're talking about a new film, and not one that carries prohibitive restoration costs with it - it strikes me as foolish to settle for whatever is given to us. If someone wants to hold out for Blu, they ought to do so. Buying it anyway is certainly in the interests of Criterion, but much less clearly in the interest of the consumer.

[aox]

...but failing that, the only effective way to lobby for a BD release is to show Criterion that it's a viable moneymaker by putting your money where your mouth is and buying the DVD!

One sees this logic often, and I just don't understand it. What you're saying is, the only way to get a superior product is by first buying an inferior one, just to prove that you really want the superior one.

I call this "the gullible consumer." It's a merchant's dream for consumers to behave this way, because it basically means that they, and not the consumers, get to dictate the marketplace. It implies that consumers ought to buy whatever merchants are willing to give them. By this logic, Criterion should announce all of their titles as DVD-only, since consumers will be flocking to double-dip in the near future anyway. Or taking things further, if you really like a Corolla, but are worried that Toyota's Corollas are dangerous, you should buy one anyway just to prove that the marketplace for a safe Corolla is viable. Because after all, if no one is buying a dangerous Corolla, that must mean that the marketplace isn't viable enough to spend all the money to make them safer!

Now, I don't really have a dog in this particular hunt. I liked the Troell, and would be happy to buy the BD, but I can't say I "loved" it. It's not a vital purchase for me, so the temptation to buy the DVD is nil. I simply have other things that I'll be happy to spend my money on that will provide as much as or more pleasure as this.

But at the same time, consumers really ought to realize that the merchants ought to be begging them to buy their products, not the other way around. And especially in this case - since we're talking about a new film, and not one that carries prohibitive restoration costs with it - it strikes me as foolish to settle for whatever is given to us. If someone wants to hold out for Blu, they ought to do so. Buying it anyway is certainly in the interests of Criterion, but much less clearly in the interest of the consumer.

Exactly.

I broke down and bought The Human Condition... now where's my Blu Ray? The answer is that it isn't coming.

[triodelover]

I admit to not knowing the motivations for Criterion only releasing this film in on DVD; I do not know much about the logistics of the market, and they may well have near-proof that a blu would be economically insufficient, or they just couldn't work out something with rights or tranfers or whatever. But, speaking as someone who doesn't love the film (I haven't seen it), it seems to me that the only way to prevent DVD-only releases in the future for films I do love (beside impassioned emails), is by not supporting these types of releases. DVD will only stop being the 'economically more doable' option once people stop buying them as much, right?

Or the company will go out of business. #-o Seriously, despite all the hype about Blu-ray sales this past holiday season and the enthusiasm with which the format is greeted by some on forums like these, DVD buyers and renters are still the lion's share of the market. The average consumer just switched to DVD a few years ago. I believe the first year that DVD sales/rentals equaled VHS sales and rentals in the US was 2004. I think the industry is trying to make the move to Blu more user friendly economically (if not technically) and I think that transition will happen at a faster pace. But I doubt that Blu-ray aficionados have enough market clout at this point (and are hardly a unified front) to make a difference.

Laserdisc and VHS were phased out only once DVD started selling more than the former formats, and I imagine it will be the same with blu-ray.

Two words: back compatibility. Laserdisc and VHS have effectively disappeared because maintaining viewing capability meant dedicated machines for each. Every BD player will play your DVDs. Several can be made region-free for both formats. As folks like MichaelB have discussed here, the DVD isn't going away simply because there are too many films (and TV) for which a Blu release cannot be justified economically or artistically. DVDs aren't going away anytime soon.

I'm aware of the paradox that if you want a better release, you have to show that there is a market for the release by buying the inferior version, and it sucks, but why should anyone antagonize those who take a personal stand and resist buying an edition of a film on a format that is being replaced?

One more word: upscaling. Upscaling algoritms have gotten very good. I can easily see why a company may choose not to produce a BD of a given film if the available elements coupled with the projected sales don't warrant the extra effort. They know that every one of their Blu-ray customers is possessed with a player or software that upscales SD to 1080p. The result, while not quite what you get in tru Blu-ray, is still very, very good and an image that the vast majority of consumers will be happy with.

And also, MOC and Criterion are very different, of course, but also very similar in their missions and title selections; Criterion's A Christmas Tale situation, and especially MOC's Une femme mariee quick turn-around are examples of why waiting isn't such a bad thing, especially when you can rent in the meantime. Criterion hasn't been too specific about their upgrade patterns, but at this 'stage' nothing will surprise me.

I said elsewhere on the forum that I wished that Criterion would be a bit more forthcoming about their back catalogue plans for BD. But since they began releases in the format, if a film new to the catalogue is going to get Blu treatment, it's always been a dual release. The exception, as has been pointed out is A Christmas Tale. The Godard is the only fim MoC has reached back and re-released on Blu and, as Nick said here, they agonized over it. He's also said that there are no plans to go further into the back catalogue for Blu releases.

So if you want Everlasting Moments in Blu now, the best hope is to convince Mulvaney and the gang over the next month or so to release it concurrently with the DVD.

[Matt]

So if you want Everlasting Moments in Blu now, the best hope is to convince Mulvaney and the gang over the next month or so to release it concurrently with the DVD.

I don't know if it had any impact on the eventual decision to release A Christmas Tale on Blu-ray, but the day after it was announced as DVD-only, I sent an e-mail to the Mulvaney address trying to convince Criterion that there was a market for the film on Blu-ray. I don't know how many other people did the same, but something eventually convinced them that it was worth it to create a Blu-ray. But then maybe that experience taught them that it actually wasn't worth releasing certain films on Blu-ray, and that's why Everlasting Moments is DVD-only.

[Tom Hagen]

Did I just read DVDs being compared to automobiles with potentially lethal design defects?

[captveg]

Actually, at this stage in the game, I would assume that if a film is going to get a Blu-ray release in the near future, it would be at the same time that it gets a DVD release. If there wasn't a compelling reason for Criterion to put this out on BD while they were actively working on a release of some form, what's going to motivate them to do so after they have moved on to other projects? For the next three months, the best strategy to get Everlasting Moments on Blu is to barrage Criterion with complaints, but failing that, the only effective way to lobby for a BD release is to show Criterion that it's a viable moneymaker by putting your money where your mouth is and buying the DVD!

Exactly. Anything released DVD only after spine # 450 (Bottle Rocket) - the first day and date DVD and Blu-ray release - simply won't have a Blu-ray release in the near future. They have to break that precedent to change this outlook.

[triodelover]

So if you want Everlasting Moments in Blu now, the best hope is to convince Mulvaney and the gang over the next month or so to release it concurrently with the DVD.

I don't know if it had any impact on the eventual decision to release A Christmas Tale on Blu-ray, but the day after it was announced as DVD-only, I sent an e-mail to the Mulvaney address trying to convince Criterion that there was a market for the film on Blu-ray. I don't know how many other people did the same, but something eventually convinced them that it was worth it to create a Blu-ray. But then maybe that experience taught them that it actually wasn't worth releasing certain films on Blu-ray, and that's why Everlasting Moments is DVD-only.

No idea if the e-mail campaign could work. I'm guessing A Christmas Tale being a holiday movie with a release date shortly after Black Friday had a lot to do with Criterion rolling the dice on it. It's certainly not a case of the materials for the Troell not being up to it since there is a BD already out, so I suspect it's more an unwillingness to use resources on this rather than on other, potentially better selling titles. There are a lot of Blus coming out between today and the release date for Everlasting Moments.

[Brian C]

Did I just read DVDs being compared to automobiles with potentially lethal design defects?

No. What you read was a description of a specific logical process applied to an absurd circumstance in order to make a point. No direct comparison was made between the utility of DVDs and dangerous cars. If the example was too absurd for you to follow, well, just be glad I didn't start talking about how swo17 is like Hitler.

[Flike]

How fucking silly. I don't understand the VHS comparison either, as the next disc-based format will still feature DVD backwards compatibility.

[fdm]

Edit to add:

Wait if you think you must, but why try to convince anyone else that they are wasting their time/money/whatever if they don't share your opinion? And why be so obnoxious about it (this isn't blu-ray.com)?

give me a break. if you want to put words in my mouth, you could be more subtle at least. I'm not telling anyone to do anything. I'm defending an innocent decision to not buy something that was questioned by two posters who were quite more hostile in their approach than I was.

Sorry, must be getting my obnoxious posters mixed up.

[ianungstad]

What is even worse to me, is that I've seen a few people comment online that they sold off their entire collection of Criterion dvds for cheap on Ebay with the intents of purchasing the collection on Blu. There was an individual who did this on the .com forums and I asked why he did that if he loved these movies so much and got the tired old spiel about how great Blu Ray is and how the SD's are irrelevant now. I just don't understand the logic.

[swo17]

Wait if you think you must, but why try to convince anyone else that they are wasting their time/money/whatever if they don't share your opinion? And why be so obnoxious about it (this isn't blu-ray.com)?

give me a break. if you want to put words in my mouth, you could be more subtle at least. I'm not telling anyone to do anything. I'm defending an innocent decision to not buy something that was questioned by two posters who were quite more hostile in their approach than I was.

If you're referring to me as one of the hostile ones, well, what did you expect from Hitler?

[triodelover]

What is even worse to me, is that I've seen a few people comment online that they sold off their entire collection of Criterion dvds for cheap on Ebay with the intents of purchasing the collection on Blu. There was an individual who did this on the .com forums and I asked why he did that if he loved these movies so much and got the tired old spiel about how great Blu Ray is and how the SD's are irrelevant now. I just don't understand the logic.

Why exactly did he think the entire collection (including titles Criterion no longer has the right to ) would be issued again on BD? Because he wanted them?

Then there was the guy over on the Blu-ray.com forum who had bought all of Criterion's BDs and was posting to ask the assembled minions if they though he would like the films. ](*,)

Some boys just can't get over their shiny toys.

[Fierias]

Wait if you think you must, but why try to convince anyone else that they are wasting their time/money/whatever if they don't share your opinion? And why be so obnoxious about it (this isn't blu-ray.com)?

give me a break. if you want to put words in my mouth, you could be more subtle at least. I'm not telling anyone to do anything. I'm defending an innocent decision to not buy something that was questioned by two posters who were quite more hostile in their approach than I was.

If you're referring to me as one of the hostile ones, well, what did you expect from Hitler?

haha, no, wasn't referring to you.

[triodelover]

Wait if you think you must, but why try to convince anyone else that they are wasting their time/money/whatever if they don't share your opinion? And why be so obnoxious about it (this isn't blu-ray.com)?

give me a break. if you want to put words in my mouth, you could be more subtle at least. I'm not telling anyone to do anything. I'm defending an innocent decision to not buy something that was questioned by two posters who were quite more hostile in their approach than I was.

If you're referring to me as one of the hostile ones, well, what did you expect from Hitler?

So you're the guy Glenn Beck keeps talking about? :-k

[aox]

I am sick of people denying the DVD Holocaust. Blu-Ray is here, it's great, and it is the future. Adapt.

[ianungstad]

The future is video on demand which is why every company is pushing the format hard. Depending on the article you read, VOD sales were $2 billion last year, almost double the sales of blu software. That probably scares me more, as I like having the actual product sitting on my shelf versus as a file on a hard drive. VOD doesn't get debated much on the forums as I'm sure most people have their reservations about the technology but it's the definitely the juggernaut looming in the background. The other major issue that's not discussed as much as it should be is that people just aren't buying movies anymore. The total dollar amounts generated by the home video market has been seeing double digit declines for almost a half decade now regardless of the format. (classic and foreign language films being hit particularly hard)

Personally, I've been buying the Criterion blus when they are available but buying a DVD of Z or Golden Age of Television, Everlasting Moments, etc. is fine. I understand that there are market considerations that prevent those from happening for different reasons. Nothing to make a stink over, IMO.

EDIT: Just to add something that's actually on topic. The MGM dvd of Coffee and Cigarettes is also out of print. Since Jim has been transitioning his library over to Criterion, I wouldn't be surprised if Coffee and Cigarettes wasn't in que.

[Flike]

You're now all expected to purchase the Everlasting Moments Blu that was just posted on the site.

[Highway 61]

With Close-Up (and The Traveler) bumped to Blu, I think it's safe to say that 2010 is Criterion's most impressive year ever. =D>

[triodelover]

With Close-Up (and The Traveler) bumped to Blu, I think it's safe to say that 2010 is Criterion's most impressive year ever. =D>

Wouldn't be more accurate to say the best half-year ever? We're only through June. A number of good teams have faded in the second half. 8-[

[Flike]

With Close-Up (and The Traveler) bumped to Blu, I think it's safe to say that 2010 is Criterion's most impressive year ever. =D>

Wouldn't be more accurate to say the best half-year ever? We're only through June. A number of good teams have faded in the second half. 8-[

See: last year, actually.

For me however, this is Criterion's best year in some time.

[domino harvey]

This is far from Criterion's most anything

[Svevan]

Amen to Domino.

[Brian C]

You're now all expected to purchase the Everlasting Moments Blu that was just posted on the site.

I will, too, and probably also Close-Up , unless I simply hate it when I see the new Janus print, which I'll see when it plays here in Chicago (it's playing in Chicago at some point, right?).

I'll also take credit for the addition, since it was obviously my "gullible consumer" post that made the difference. Clearly it was the threat of being associated with Toyota that broke them.