Criterion Blu-ray

[aox]

Yeah, if there is one title that I feel 100% confident will come this year, it is The Seven Samurai.

[Matt]

After what happened with Ran and Contempt, I'm amazed that anyone would still consider selling their DVD version before they have the Blu-ray version in hand. I realize those two were Studio Canal licenses and Seven Samurai is not, but I still wouldn't take the chance.

[Finch]

Don't make me more anxious than I already am, Matt. I sold my DVD two months ago once word got out that Criterion are releasing this [-o< in 1080p. This better not be a repeat of the Ran debacle.

[mteller]

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Blu-Rays coming from Image 8/24:

Time Bandits
Withnail and I
Mona Lisa
The Long Good Friday

[dx23]

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

Blu-Rays coming from Image 8/24:

Time Bandits
Withnail and I
Mona Lisa
The Long Good Friday

Why couldn't Image let Criterion handle those 4 releases?

[HistoryProf]

No kidding. what's the point of the distribution arrangement if they're just going to take films from Criterion? seems rather short sighted to me, as clearly the brand recognition alone would assure better sales.

[kaujot]

Didn't Image release barebones SD versions of those films the first time around, and then let Criterion issue "deluxe" editions?

[perkizitore]

And no extras at all! It seems i am keeping my UK blu-rays of Withnail & I and Long Good Friday. I hope at least Image will include subs on these.

[Jeff]

Criterion could have bid for the Handmade Films license, but either chose not to or underbid. I suspect that they've got their hands so full of backlogged titles licensed from MGM, The Caidin Trust, IFC, Focus, Fox, Paramount, Universal, and Sony in addition to their own Janus stuff that they can't be bothered to revisit those four titles, much less spend more money on re-licensing them. They've got 35-40 titles in the works from MGM, Caidin, and IFC alone!

The upcoming Image Blu-rays will have an MSRP of $17.98 meaning that you'll probably be able to find them for $10-15. They are bare bones except for trailers, and a Gilliam interview on Time Bandits, but the $40 Criterion DVDs weren't exactly stacked either and mostly had sub-par non-anamorphic transfers.

[Feego]

I wonder if the Image transfer of The Long Good Friday will be the same one that Anchor Bay UK used for their edition. According to a reviewer on Amazon UK, the Anchor Bay edition is heavily cropped on all four sides, as a letter from Anchor Bay themselves confirmed. This only concerns the Blu-ray edition, not the DVD.

I rented the Criterion edition of Mona Lisa just a couple of weeks ago, and for a non-anamorphic transfer, I thought it looked pretty good, plus it has a commentary. I think I'll just stick to my Anchor Bay edition of Time Bandits, and perhaps if I find a good deal one day, pick up the Criterion edition for the commentary.

[cdnchris]

Though not a huge deal (but something I'm happy to finally see) Criterion has added a "Resume Playback" feature to their Blu-rays for The Leopard, Red Desert, and Everlasting Moments. I'm hoping that they're going to keep doing this for all of their future ones.

[aox]

Calling for the release of less Blu Ray pretty much means you should turn in your cinema fan card.

[Perkins Cobb]

Calling for the release of less Blu Ray pretty much means you should turn in your cinema fan card.

Watching movies on Blu Ray instead of insisting on a pristine 35mm screening means you should turn in your cinema fan card. Oh, no, wait -- that'd be ridiculous.

Actually, I'd be delighted to see Criterion go Blu-only. Just as long as they release more new titles and fewer upgrades.

[aox]

Calling for the release of less Blu Ray pretty much means you should turn in your cinema fan card.

Watching movies on Blu Ray instead of insisting on a pristine 35mm screening means you should turn in your cinema fan card. Oh, no, wait -- that'd be ridiculous.

I shall join this on the next step. Is your point to go backwards to prove.....wait....... whoa....35mm pristine prints are just a straw man? yes?

I am just going to assume, for your sake, that you aren't this dumb and you understand my point; especially in conjunction with the Mission Statement. I love people that love a visual medium that resist 'seeing' it better.

I hope the respect you gave me matches the respect I am giving you.

[CrazedCollector]

I don't understand why Criterion keeps releasing SD titles - the overlap from LD to DVD was nowhere near this big. I'm guessing it has to do with already-capitulated rights for certain titles (example: Sternbergs)? But all the same, I am sick of SD-exclusives.

[matrixschmatrix]

I don't understand why Criterion keeps releasing SD titles - the overlap from LD to DVD was nowhere near this big. I'm guessing it has to do with already-capitulated rights for certain titles (example: Sternbergs)? But all the same, I am sick of SD-exclusives.

As I understand it, there are a lot of movies that don't necessarily have the source elements of high enough quality to make upgrading to blu-ray worthwhile. Can anyone confirm or deny that?

[knives]

Yes, the only titles that Criterion's handled recently that this problem would arise with though is the Golden Age box and the Costas. Everything else they've put out recently is just because of financial and rights reasons.

[Perkins Cobb]

Aox, yes, a straw man is a rhetorical device, sort of like "hoping" I'm not really that dumb. Thanks for your concern on that point, by the way. I am not making the argument that DVD is good enough or Blu isn't worth bothering with or anything silly like that. I'm pointing out that for every old Criterion DVD that gets a Blu upgrade, that's one other never-before-available-on-digital-home-video film that remains in the vaults. Given that Criterion's resources are finite, the choice comes down to image quality vs. quantity of films in the Collection. At this point, my preference (for the most part) is for quantity.

[kaujot]

Also, dvd players are incapable of playing Laserdiscs, whereas with blu-ray we've got the backwards compatibility.

[Tribe]

I don't understand why Criterion keeps releasing SD titles

And this bothers you because......?

[hangman]

As I understand it, there are a lot of movies that don't necessarily have the source elements of high enough quality to make upgrading to blu-ray worthwhile. Can anyone confirm or deny that?

Adding to what Knives said, the Eclipse sets, some Essential Art House, and the War Trilogy (which was a long time restoration that doesn't appear to have considered Blu at the time) also would fall under material that may not be good enough for Blu. It could also be that no HD master exists for the material, e.g. MoC's There's Always Tomorrow, that would work for Blu/Blu upgrade.

I don't understand why Criterion keeps releasing SD titles

Tribe took the words out of my mouth, criterion still releasing SD DVD exclusive titles of great films that you've never seen before and giving them the criterion treatment (i.e. value for money/informative extras) bothers you because...? Ok I can understand that you want to see the films in the best possible material but unfortunately for some titles that is unlikely, any time soon or ever, so would you rather have those films never released at all? Its been discussed thoroughly in the old discussions but a big chunk of the VHS-DVD titles are still missing when the transition came, with this at least obscure titles hindered only by source materials at least still have a fighting chance to be released rather than none at all. Or the other scenario say with Vampyr which rather than being released 2008 would be released much later, when its undergone further restoration to be at Blu quality (by then who knows if a new format is ready ).

[akaten]

For what its worth I think the best thing for them to do would be to have a clear public announcement on future policy, something along the lines of "from now on, all films going in production for the Criterion range, providing the rights and materials allow for it, will be HD only and released only on Blu Ray."

That would still give people plenty of time to buy a Blu Ray player before this came into effect on the releases being lined up each month and crucially would finally put to bed any complaints and speculation as to what their approach is on the matter in the years to come.

[hangman]

For what its worth I think the best thing for them to do would be to have a clear public announcement on future policy, something along the lines of "from now on, all films going in production for the Criterion range, providing the rights and materials allow for it, will be HD only and released only on Blu Ray."

That would still give people plenty of time to buy a Blu Ray player before this came into effect on the releases being lined up each month and crucially would finally put to bed any complaints and speculation as to what their approach is on the matter in the years to come.

I don't see the point of this D: If they can release it in HD they do adding to that their newsletters are giving hints/advertising that upcoming titles are Blu. Also you have the criterion site that shows upcoming titles whether it will have a Blu or not months before the title is released. If anything its more a rarity now to have an SD-DVD exclusive since the trend has noticeably been to release Blu if possible. Also considering that costs for printing SD-DVD's have gone down and they continue the practice (same with BFI) what is the harm in releasing for both formats when they're a big enough company to handle it. Criterion certainly has quite a backlog of titles and they still manage roughly the same output per month so they are quite capable, handling dual format doesn't appear to be tying their resources the way it did with MoC.

Besides given the time that has passed since the HD DVD Vs. Blu more and more people are preparing, or have already, procured a Blu ray player. Just look at the forums with more members sporting Blu ray players compared to before. People know its the format right now but some may not find the incentive to switch yet or whatever other reasons.

Sure it might be some loss in revenue (but we don't have any figures of the DVD-Blu ratio) but it is also possible that they are still making sales with their practice, sales may be more inelastic since the price point of SD-DVD's haven't changed but producing it has (except perhaps for the upcoming September titles and some other exceptions). Lets face it Criterion's DVD's aren't priced low which might be one factor in their favor. The market is still there, not everyone has switched to Blu, for those who buy SD-DVD. Eventually if they do intend to stick to just Blu-ray they can just opt to stop printing SD-DVD versions of the films, and allow the stock to just run out.

[akaten]

The reason is simple, while it was understandable a year or so ago for indecision on the matter, is it best to continue dividing your audience into two groups with two products to produce, market and distribute when you can outline a policy decision now which over time (when the films signed from now onwards are ready) will ensure they are all buying the same version.

It also gives people plenty of forewarning and time to seriously consider and save for a Blu Ray player (and HD TV) if they haven't done so before.

[hangman]

The reason is simple, while it was understandable a year or so ago for indecision on the matter, is it best to continue dividing your audience into two groups with two products to produce, market and distribute when you can outline a policy decision now which over time (when the films signed from now onwards are ready) will ensure they are all buying the same version.

Is the advertising for the markets necessarily different? Isn't the target market the same, i.e. film buffs. Moreover, sans picture quality (which should be obvious) the products are essentially the same version (extras wise) unless you mean something else (are you referring to possible re-issues? If so part of the factor there is new restorations that the films undergo which is beyond Criterion). However, like I said is it necessarily indecision right now when they do have incentive economically speaking to continue producing both DVD and Blu. Moreover, I would at least assume that when Criterion does sign films they do opt for the best possible material available (given their mission statement for what that's worth) to produce whatever best image quality, which can if possible be transferred to Blu or produce a high quality DVD image. As for getting people to start saving up for Blu, if they aren't already, its nothing that already isn't happening (with DVD companies releasing more Blu choices, BFI being one of the leaders in this). In addition prices of Blu ray players and HD-TV's have gone down, another incentive. Other reasons for not saving for a Blu may not even be economical, like some holding out until region-free situation has been improved.