criterionforum.org

If the lack of original titles is a dealbreaker for you then so be it, but I think some of TMDaines comments about Kino in general are wildly exaggerated. The quality of their releases over the last few years has been, with few exceptions, extremely high. The Keatons (among my most treasured Blus), Griffiths, Eisensteins, Langs, etc. -- as well as the great non-silent releases -- are all stunners. They've largely been sticking to famous titles rather than obscurities, but regardless, I'm failing to see all of the alternatives that "hugely trump" Kino's releases from the last few years. They've become one of the most important labels in the US, easily. Grousing about the intertitle practice I can understand, but complaining about the "overall quality of their releases" seems kind of absurd at this point.

The thing is I really couldn't care less who releases the films I'm interested in. The labels I like the most are those who do a good job and not because I'm a fan of them inherently. I would love for Kino to treat their FOREIGN silents (and indeed sound films) better and then I'd snap them up. Their releases of FOREIGN silents pretty much always fail to compare to those released by European labels (MoC, Divisa, Edition Filmuseum and the odd one from elsewhere) whether that be crappy PAL/NTSC conversion or the removal of the original language intertitles.

It takes effort to replace the intertitles. This doesn't denote someone who can't figure out how to "do a good job," but someone who has a different opinion than you about how best to present these films to the American audiences to which they are licensed to sell.

swo17 wrote:It takes effort to replace the intertitles. This doesn't denote someone who can't figure out how to "do a good job," but someone who has a different opinion than you about how best to present these films to the American audiences to which they are licensed to sell.

I'd completely disagree. As you said it takes effort to replace them, so why can't we have both? Why are they forcing people to have watch their reworked version of a piece of art. A translation is always a a reworking to some extent, as every translator will come up with a different translation. If translation was a science then translators would be completely redundant in the modern world as everything would be done electronically. I don't need a film to be filtered through Kino in order to enjoy it so why do they force it on people?

I couldn't give a shit whether people in the past had to be subjected to international versions whether they be because of censorship, commercial reasons or making a work more palatable to a different culture. It's completely unnecessary in today's age.

The whole licensing for North America argument is so completely naive in the modern globalised world where online shopping is so prevalent. They're perfectly entitled to sell their releases to foreigners and ship them aboard, provided the sale takes place in the US, as it will do through any US online retail store. Any DVD label who ignores this section of the market, especially when dealing with niche films, are complete fools.

TMDaines wrote:I'd completely disagree.

Well, I only made three points, two of which (replacing intertitles entails effort, and you have a difference of opinion from Kino) I should think are fairly incontrovertible, so I assume you're getting hung up on the idea that, in spite of Kino's policy regarding how to present foreign silents, they could still be described as doing "a good job." Perhaps this just comes down to semantics, but may I suggest that if, rather than lambasting these people as "complete fools," you were to word your complaints more like "Kino really seem to have stepped up the quality control in the last few years. I just wish they would change their policy about replacing intertitles for foreign silents," that more people (and indeed, Kino) might take you seriously.

Nope, I stand by my statement that DVD labels who ignore the export market are complete fools. I'm not sure what's so upsetting about that to you. I also find it strange that a comapny should be praised from eliminating the Facets-esque releases and now reaching another minimal standard. They're a private business, not a charity or non-profit organisation. A lot of their releases are still utter mediocrity and far and away from being the quality of the top labels worldwide, despite the prices.

TMDaines wrote:A lot of their releases are still utter mediocrity and far and away from being the quality of the top labels worldwide, despite the prices.

Which ones? What Kino silent release from say, the last year, is 'an utter mediocrity'? Have you ever actually bought or watched any of them?

TMDaines wrote:They're perfectly entitled to sell their releases to foreigners and ship them aboard, provided the sale takes place in the US, as it will do through any US online retail store. Any DVD label who ignores this section of the market, especially when dealing with niche films, are complete fools.

Tell that to Warner Brothers Archive. And unlike Kino they even have the worldwide rights at least for their releases of old films, I'd guess.

matrixschmatrix wrote:

TMDaines wrote:A lot of their releases are still utter mediocrity and far and away from being the quality of the top labels worldwide, despite the prices.

Which ones? What Kino silent release from say, the last year, is 'an utter mediocrity'? Have you ever actually bought or watched any of them?

I didn't specify silents here. Their Italian Blu-rays have been a real mixed bag. A good purchase if you don't currently own any of them but the Ieri, oggi, domani doesn't really look that much better than Eureka's DVD upscaled and certainly pales compared to the German Blu-ray (I have/had all three).

Potemkin's fine but runs at the wrong speed due to a lack of foresight. Why speed up a PAL master when you can get rid of the extra frames and then put in only as many extra frames as necessary?

Admittedly most of their Blu-ray English language silent releases from the last few years have been very good but that's not their whole catalogue.

O my goodness.

but a bit of a slog to listen to since Kalat's reading voice comes off as a bit too self-satisfied.

I don't even know what that means. Though as someone who's listened to pretty well every Kalat commentary there is, I actually think the Scarlet Street one isn't among his best- it's very caught up in the money and production details and not too much connected to the movie itself. It's still good, but I think he was coming in as an expert on Lang rather than based on a connection to Scarlet Street in particular.

Impeccably researched and highly informative, but a bit of a slog to listen to since Kalat's reading voice comes off as a bit too self-satisfied.

Dude sounds jealous, I think. If he wanted self-satisfied, he should've imagined how a Susie Bright commentary on Belle du jour would've sounded! No offense to men like Michael Wood on Belle du jour or James S. Williams on Orpheus who give rather well-informed though dry commentary, but I'll take Kalat over those two (chosen from two of my favorite commentaries of late) any day for sheer fun and compelling presentation. Would he have preferred a Bogdanovich commentary?

or richard schickel

Self satisfied my ass... Kalat is LANG satisfied, a genuine fanatic who can never say enough about a topic that he loves his feelings are so passionate. Talk about missing the boat entirely!

David K is as nice, humble,and approachable guy as exists.

His twin Godzilla commentaries are marvels of information, love and passion.

Ive adored this guy since his dvd label introduced me to CHRIST IN CONCRETE, and of course my favorite film of all time, Epsteins USHER.

HerrSchreck wrote:and of course my favorite film of all time, Epsteins USHER.

Speaking of which, is only $5 from the All Day website.

Thank you! Ordered, along with The Sadist.

It's a shame that Kino didn't bother offering subtitles for those who need them. I hate it when a company does that.

A shame indeed. As someone who often relies on subtitling, I was greatly disappointed to find out that Kino did not subtitle also their soon to be released Scarlet Street BR. God knows why they make this choice and ignore a large group of people (those who are hard of hearing and non native speakers of English) when the practice of ignoring these audiences is almost extinct among most DVD labels. I am saying that sadly as someone who otherwise appreciates Kino and buys many of their DVDs/BRs that I can watch without a problem (subtitled foreign films or silent films with intertitles).

It's pretty stupid indeed.

david hare wrote:Is it actually "legal" for Kino to skip on HOH subs?
It finally became legally mandated in both Oz and France only last year, but I had assumed the USA was always years ahead in this regard. It's not as though we're not paying them enough damn loot.

um, yeah it's legal. There's no law that says HoH subtitles have to be included on blu-rays. Although I'd love companies like Kino, Shout!, Code Red, Scorpion etc. to have subtitles.

It certainly can't be legally compulsory in Britain, otherwise Optimum (and others) would be faced with a massive fine.

In fact, I vividly remember when Optimum put out Alexander Mackendrick's triumph-over-deafness drama Mandy without HOH subtitles, a decision that was almost as stupid as opening the film The Waterdance in a cinema that didn't have wheelchair access (and because it died on its arse thanks to the way it effectively excluded a fair chunk of its target audience, the film closed after a week and didn't transfer anywhere more appropriate).

If I remember rightly, the BFI adds HOH subtitles whenever possible, unless the production budget is unexpectedly tight for some reason - in which case, sadly, it's the easiest thing to sacrifice without having to cut corners elsewhere.

UPDATE: It seems that Mandy was reissued the following year with HOH subtitles, almost certainly as a result of strong public pressure - doubtless coupled with the belated realisation that Optimum were actually losing sales over this.

Michael, that's certainly true about Optimum, but under the new Studio Canal logo their recent DVD and Blu-Ray releases have all had HoH, for which I'm grateful.

Kino's otherwise fine release of David Holzman's Diary definitely would have benefited from HoH subs—I could barely understand anything being said in the street scene with the transsexual.

MichaelB wrote:If I remember rightly, the BFI adds HOH subtitles whenever possible, unless the production budget is unexpectedly tight for some reason - in which case, sadly, it's the easiest thing to sacrifice without having to cut corners elsewhere.

It was nice when I picked up the BFI Blu upgrade of A Zed and Two Noughts to find that it now had HOH subtitles, as there had been a subtitle track on the previous disc but unfortunately only in Dutch!

I know that everyone seems to be moving away from commentary tracks now but selfishly one of the other great advantages I found from HOH (or even just the English subtitles on foreign language films) subtitles is the convenience of having them playing during a commentary just to keep tabs on the narrative progress of the film!