MoC Forthcoming, Wishlist, and Random Speculation

[Zot!]

Especially in a quality that allows for a blu-ray release. I think MoC has stated that they can fund maybe only one transfer/restoration a year themselves, if that, and the rest of the time they have to depend on preexisting masters. No shame in this, as simply having these films available and handled with such quality makes them unique unto themselves. But I understand the desire for something out of left field, and there are still pretty major things that don't exist in English friendly versions or have gone out of print on DVD, or never got beyond VHS. Criterion has the money to fund more of these "rediscoveries" to their credit.

[Perkins Cobb]

I'm not saying it's not difficult ... just that these days my dollars go for stuff that I haven't seen before, not for Blu-ray upgrades, cool as those are in theory. I've probably bought 10 BFI releases in the past year and only a couple of MOCs.

I'm not even sure I'd import the Imamura just to get Nishi Ginza Station, which is only an hour long, right?

EDIT: Oh, and, TMDaines, that's not at all true, is it? Granted that a DVD label would quickly go broke only releasing obscurities, but the MOC and Criterion wishlist threads are full of hundreds of titles for which there are adequate elements. MOC continues to pick some of these off (Coeur Fidele, for one) but I was just a little disappointed at not finding many in this big raft of 2012 announcements.

[swo17]

In all seriousness, how many films could they release that could be new-to-home video (that would have any sort of market)?

Your last caveat is a bit tricky to gauge, but there are surely hundreds of films that have never been released to home video that, if not eagerly awaited by an already established market, could be positioned as some great new discovery (like the tagline Janus gave Dillinger Is Dead: "The Most Incredible Film You've Never Seen") and do well enough. (Wasn't House also incredibly successful for Criterion, and perhaps also MoC?)

That being said, I have zero problems with revisiting already available titles (especially to put them on Blu-ray) when they include films sorely in need of an upgrade (like the Pasolinis) or films that otherwise feel like they have been unfairly treated by their rightsowners. With Touch of Evil and Ruggles of Red Gap in particular, it feels like MoC has swooped in and rescued these titles from the clutches of a mustachioed villain.

[TMDaines]

I presumed we were taking about titles that had never ever been released on DVD or BD anywhere in the world? If we're talking about stuff that just hasn't been released in English-friendly versions (or go even further and talk about stuff that just hasn't been released in one of the two major English markets (US & UK)) then there's truckloads.

Dillinger Is Dead, for example, already had an English-friendly release before Criterion released it, so by definition that wouldn't have counted as a new title also, no?

Obviously there are films out there that haven't been released anywhere but it's not like there's a big pile of them ready to go that the labels are ignoring.

[swo17]

I only brought up Dillinger as an example of a strategy for marketing a film that has no built-in audience. There is in fact a very big pile of great films that have never officially been released on DVD or BD anywhere in the world (though not necessarily "ready to go"). This is apart from the other pile of great films released but not in English-friendly editions. Not to mention the pile of great films that no one knows about yet. MoC could triple its strength and release nothing but films from these piles for 100 years and still only scratch the surface. (Though in reality, they would just end up going bankrupt in a few months.)

[TIVOLI]

Let's take Ruggles of Red Gap as an example of important heretofore unreleased films on DVD. If we confine ourselves to American films roughly contemporaneous, we have Sternberg's Crime and Punishment, Wellman's Beggars of Life, Walsh's Me and My Gal, Vidor's The Stranger's Return as well as his classic late silents. We have films by Leisen, La Cava, and the woefully neglected John Stahl. And we are still, still waiting for Borzage's brilliant History is Made at Night. I am certainly glad to have MOC issue McCarey's film. But all rights issues aside, a case can be made that at least some of these other works are equally deserving to see the light of day.

[knives]

Some good news for you than, criterion is working on a release for History is Made at Night.

[Tommaso]

I presumed we were taking about titles that had never ever been released on DVD or BD anywhere in the world? If we're talking about stuff that just hasn't been released in English-friendly versions (or go even further and talk about stuff that just hasn't been released in one of the two major English markets (US & UK)) then there's truckloads.

Exactly, which is why I'm also a bit disappointed by the announcements so far, glad as I am about the Pasolini upgrades. But look for example at French films from the 30s and 40s, already released in France in fine, but unsubbed editions. I'm sure there's a market for Renoir's "La chienne", Ophuls' "Sans lendemain" or Carné's "Les visiteurs du soir" in the English-speaking world.

Obviously there are films out there that haven't been released anywhere but it's not like there's a big pile of them ready to go that the labels are ignoring.

Silents. Truckloads of them, literally. And sometimes even already restored, like Gerlach's "Zur Chronik von Grieshuus" or Epstein's "Mauprat". All it takes is to bring Nick's father into the recording studio to do some soundtrack with his concertina;)

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

Silents. Truckloads of them, literally. And sometimes even already restored, like Gerlach's "Zur Chronik von Grieshuus" or Epstein's "Mauprat". All it takes is to bring Nick's father into the recording studio to do some soundtrack with his concertina;)

Not to speak of a boatload (pun intended) of 'Chaland' films like Epstein's La Belle Nivernaise, La Hirondelle et la mesange and Choux's La Vocation d'Andre Carel, Gremillon's Maldone and the 1911 short 'Les Chalands'. Why not throw in a L'Atalante blu and voila a Barge box set. Maybe MoC could market it to the Barge holiday fraternity like BFI did recently by tapping into the real ale and Morris dancing set with Health to the Barley Mow.

[Miguel M Santos]

We have films by Leisen, La Cava, and the woefully neglected John Stahl. And we are still, still waiting for Borzage's brilliant History is Made at Night.

More Stahl, Borzage and Leisen would be a wonderful thing, especially those not available elsewhere.

[peerpee]

A lot of our decisions are unfortunately being guided by whether or not a decent HD scan and restoration exists. If we can pump more money into that, we'd be able to be a bit more radical in our selections, but we release around 24 titles a year and most of those are HD scans/restorations to which we've contributed or helped get off the ground. They take a long time and cost a lot of money. If we only released titles that we were solely restoring and investing in, we'd be lucky to release 2 a year.

[evillights]

I second and verify what Nick said.

The next big crisis meme in cinema/home-video is the story of few, paradoxically perhaps, championing any history of cinema that's taken place in the last 40 years. In terms of demand and desire: a new fetishism has become entrenched around cinema of 1920s to 1960s, and it's fairly worrying; it's not an equal interest-field, at least in terms of video and online-buzz, for the directors (excluding American "New Hollywood") who have made a lasting and significant mark on the artform since then, and who have become, reasonably so, I think, a given or par for the course as acknowledged Major Greats in any thousands of dialogues around repertory cinema programs or blog/magazine conversation. I wonder (sincerely) why there exists such discrepancy between video enthusiasts' slate of director-heroes, and those of the rest of the cinephile world, which I believe constitute a more expansive list, and many of whom speak to specifically modern concerns. We receive countless cries for the films of Grémillon, and nothing for the films of Garrel, and it is interesting. I (again, sincerely) wonder why this is? — though I have a few suspicions. Parallel to all of the aforesaid, so much energy went into the MoC Pialat releases, 'Colossal Youth,' etc. ... Hopefully someday such works will be considered by a wider audience as rightfully parallel to some of the older canonical works, so to speak, if not, indeed, superior to many of them (which is not to diminish particular canonical classics — it's simply to say that these works, Pialat, Costa, and so on, despite being newer, are just indeed greater than many of the hallowed works of the '20s through '60s, and many of us would probably agree that's not a controversial stance).

[John Edmond]

If it wasn't for the importance of the letter G I would have gone with Eustache for that example - while it could be better the amount of Garrel on English subtitled DVD far outstrips Grémillon. Plus Garrel will always have Martin banging the drum for him.

But trust me, any release you make that uses Taiwan Central Motion Pictures's recent transfers of Hu, Hou, Yang or Tsai will be greedily purchased. And you don't want to know what I'd do for simple DVD (with English subs) releases of Pialat's Les Maison des bois or Rivette's Duelle and Noroît (if only for Lubtchansky's sake).

[Tommaso]

We receive countless cries for the films of Grémillon, and nothing for the films of Garrel, and it is interesting. I (again, sincerely) wonder why this is? — though I have a few suspicions.

I'm not sure whether I fully understand your points, but Grémillon vs Garrel is perhaps not the best example. Is there any film by Gremillon available in the English-speaking world, ANY? It would be great if you could explain a little what your "suspicions" are.

Parallel to all of the aforesaid, so much energy went into the MoC Pialat releases, 'Colossal Youth,' etc. ... Hopefully someday such works will be considered by a wider audience as rightfully parallel to some of the older canonical works, so to speak, if not, indeed, superior to many of them (which is not to diminish particular canonical classics — it's simply to say that these works, Pialat, Costa, and so on, despite being newer, are just indeed greater than many of the hallowed works of the '20s through '60s, and many of us would probably agree that's not a controversial stance).

In any case, I don't think it's a good starting point to play 'classic' cinema against 'modern' cinema in terms of saying one is greater than the other. There is no 'superiority' for 'either side', but just different kinds of cinema, and there's really no dearth in releases of less known contemporary directors if you look at labels like Second Run or Artificial Eye (to name just two).

As to the clamouring for 'older canonical works', and speaking about myself only: I certainly wouldn't clamour for MoC releasing more Lang and Murnau, but so far, when MoC has released silents, it has been with a few exceptions (like "Asphalt", "Michael" and "The Holy Mountain", all released rather long ago) precisely those films that are already very well known and already available elsewhere. So if you rightly underline the good work that MoC has done for less 'canonical' modern directors like Pialat, the logical step to question the canon would be to release more stuff from less known 'classical' directors . I've mentioned the names of Gerlach, Grune, Pick, Forst and indeed Grémillon more than enough in this and other threads; their films may be talked about in film histories, but their works can't be seen in any way apart from age-old, shoddy recordings circulating among fans and collectors. Their films are far more in danger of being forgotten by 'official' film history than many newer films.

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

Heartily echo Tom's remark and also wonder what is hinted at exactly by these suspicions and accusations of fetishism. Without wanting to sound like a second hand Nothing here are we looking at a cabal of cinephiles who have either concocted a situationist prank or in a preening attempt at self agrandisement anointed a tranche of undeserving films by virtue of them being hallowed by obscurity?
As John Edmond also noted what is to be gained by equating Gremillon with Garrel , other than some alliterative arbitrary sideswipe? As one of the 'clamouring' voices for more Gremillon I have about 6 or 7 Garrel legitimately released titles on my shelves and frankly, to be testy about it, that's about as much of re-treads of Garrel's life with Nico that I need.
One of the great things about MoC, and why my shelves sag with every single MoC release ( a form of brand loyalty fetishism that I trust you're OK with), is that they have introduced me to films I would not otherwise known about and subsequently cherish. Naruse take a bow. I have all the Pialat's and will willing upgrade to Blu as Gaumont or MoC release them and I don't feel that I have to enter into some grading for greatness competition when viewing them.
But seeing as the gauntlet has been thrown down I do wonder about this contrariness with Gremillon. Maldone exists in a restored version and is presumably ready to go. La Petite Lise for my money knocks Blackmail and Lang's M into a cocked hat as an extraordinary example of the radical use of sound in the nascent sound era. It's sitting there ready to enter the canon but it needs MoC or similar to light the powder and get it seen more widely and proselytize its worth through an informed booklet, essays etc which you have so richly done and continue to do. The last Gremillon I'll bring up, for fear of too much whimpering, is Remorques with, let us not forget, Jean Gabin and Michele Morgan, in a good MK2 version with a pretty good Gremillon introductory doc.
So you can't blame people for wondering out loud about the lack of these if you are going to put out the 'lesser' Lang's and Murnaus and Feyder for example. I am sure as witnessed by the enthusiasm that greets every MoC news release that its eclectisim is what excites and gets people to invest in choices that they otherwise wouldn't make. Of course there have been market disappointments but is Gremillon really such a non-starter?

[colinr0380]

I would also agree with Tommaso. Perhaps the clamoring for 20s-60s films by 'video enthusiasts' could be put down to their having more experience of seeing these films in previous formats, therefore knowing that there are great films out there that may never have been released on DVD yet, let alone Blu-ray. I do not think that this is exactly a conservative mentality, just that people are working from what they are aware of, much as I guess film companies do when they are deciding which titles to acquire for distribution.

I do not think this should be used as an argument against 'discovering' directors though, more that there has to be a balance found between releasing established, well known classics in updated editions (that will likely have a big audence), and introducing entirely new filmmakers (or directors who used to have greater exposure but who have fallen from view) to that same audience's attention. This is probably where branding pays off, since you can suggest that you consider a particular filmmaker who may not be as well known deserves the attention also being lavished on a Lang or Murnau.

The issue seems to just be of getting cinema, of whatever kind, seen. Then a film can start to build its audience and a filmmaker their wider reputations, which in turn would likely lead to greater sales of copies of the films and more interest in the rest of their works. At the moment there is no point in talking about Gremillon, or Hou Hsio-Hsien or Stanley Kwan, because there is still no easy way to see their films, even presumably taking piracy channels into account (I have not checked this, I hasten to add!) This is part of why the relative paucity of world cinema and silents on UK television in recent years is such a big issue - without those tasters of a wider world of film out there, would people even consider taking the chance on buying a film, even by Murnau? Hopefully that Mark Cousins series will help to inspire this demand a little bit more.

At the very least with the sterling work that Masters of Cinema have been doing with Pialat and now Imamura there is the opportunity both to target those who know of the directors with the release of some of their more unavailable works as well as introducing a whole new generation of cinephiles to their work as a whole.

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

At the moment there is no point in talking about Gremillon, or Hou Hsio-Hsien or Stanley Kwan, because there is still no easy way to see their films

But Colin isn't this a bit of a tautology? Whither the momentum for the release of Coeur fidele for example? Gremillon is gathering pace in little retrospectives as noted in these pages plus ARTE broadcast the restored Maldone. I am sure MoC's market for these type of titles are not limited to the UK and the exposure there are they?
I mean get Carax to do an introduction/essay on La Petite Lise, get fucking Amanda Knox on board, just get it out there meaningfully!

[Finch]

The last Gremillon I'll bring up, for fear of too much whimpering, is Remorques with, let us not forget, Jean Gabin and Michele Morgan, in a good MK2 version with a pretty good Gremillon introductory doc.

I see Remorques is sold individually and in a bundle with Pickpocket and 400 Blows but only the set is listed as having english subs. Can anyone confirm if the standalone release of the Gremillion has or hasn't subs? Thanks.

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

The last Gremillon I'll bring up, for fear of too much whimpering, is Remorques with, let us not forget, Jean Gabin and Michele Morgan, in a good MK2 version with a pretty good Gremillon introductory doc.

I see Remorques is sold individually and in a bundle with Pickpocket and 400 Blows but only the set is listed as having english subs. Can anyone confirm if the standalone release of the Gremillion has or hasn't subs? Thanks.

It hasn't....yet

[Askew]

Does anyone have any idea what the next dual format upgrades will be or when they will be released?

[Finch]

It hasn't....yet

Looks like I've got to go for the boxset even though I already have Pickpocket and am generally lukewarm on Truffaut.

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

It hasn't....yet

Looks like I've got to go for the boxset even though I already have Pickpocket and am generally lukewarm on Truffaut.

Attention! Are you sure Remorques has subs? Sometimes the info on box sets refers only to one title as opposed to all the contents. It was shown on Cinemoi last year I think I'm sure they'll be copies knocking around.

[zedz]

Does anyone have any idea what the next dual format upgrades will be or when they will be released?

Yeah, it's been NEARLY A WEEK since the announcement of the year, covering several months worth of MoC releases. So aren't we well overdue for the full list of 2013/14 releases? What's wrong with you, MoC?

On the other matter, I tend to agree with the MoC crew, and have harped on about this before, since I think the received notion that international film culture somehow stopped, or was horribly degraded, after the sixties is an incredibly dangerous one. But in my opinion this is generally expressed by a constrained and outmoded canon that runs aground after it hits the French New Wave and its Italian contemporaries (Fellini, Antonioni, Visconti). Hence the ludicrous complaints that Criterion had 'run out of' great cinema after it issued its last available Fellini or Bergman. World cinema in the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s was just as vibrant and exciting, but you're not going to comprehend that if you're only looking at the output of those same old 60s directors, or even at the countries they came from. Personally, I tend to be much more excited by an overlooked contemporary master getting his or her due than the usual supects enjoying their umpteenth reissue, and I'd argue that collectively, MoC's Pialat releases are their most important contribution to film culture to date (and that Pialat is possibly the most important French director of the past fifty years).

That said, I think Gremillon is possibly the worst example to use in what was already a bewildering comparison (since non-Hollywood cinema of the 1930s is probably even more of a terra incognita for most people than non-English language cinema of the 80s and 90s), as none of his films are available with English subs. You want to know why people keep requesting Gremillon? Because after years and years of requests there are still none of his films available. So don't expect that to stop any time soon.

Garrel is almost as foolish a counter-example, as a huge amount of his work is available in fine editions with English subs (or are films that don't require them). I'm aware of at least ten such releases, which accounts for nearly half his feature output. There are plenty of other contemporary filmmakers I wish were as well served on DVD. So you want to know why people aren't clamouring for MoC to release Garrel's films? Because they can already go out and buy a fair number of them, and some are even already available in the UK. A better example would be Eustache, but that would harm your argument, since there has always plenty of lobbying in these parts for his films to be released.

[Ashirg]

Does anyone have any idea what the next dual format upgrades will be or when they will be released?

Profound Desires of the Gods is on October 24, according to Amazon...

[Tommaso]

I think the received notion that international film culture somehow stopped, or was horribly degraded, after the sixties is an incredibly dangerous one. But in my opinion this is generally expressed by a constrained and outmoded canon that runs aground after it hits the French New Wave and its Italian contemporaries (Fellini, Antonioni, Visconti).

The problem might rather be that a 'good' canon can only be established with a lot of hindsight, and possibly only by people who didn't have to live through the time they're talking about. If we lived in the 50s (or even in Weimar times) , we would have to sit through quite a few bad films that are now rightly consecrated to oblivion, just as we now have to sit through a vast majority of bad or at least uninteresting films that will equally be forgotten in thirty years time. But all this doesn't account for the 'received notion' of a horribly degraded film culture; I don't see the degradation nor do I see the received notion about it; it's just much harder to tell what will stand the test of time.

But perhaps I'm only writing this because I've just come home from a screening of "Melancholia", which blew me out of my socks... (I don't think anyone has complained about Criterion releasing "Antichrist", btw).