criterionforum.org

aox wrote:Your implication is a faulty application of logic. Just because there are titles in the collection that have lost or are losing money, doesn't prove that they were released as some altruistic film venture. There is no reason to believe CC has ever released a title they didn't think would be profitable.

What you're saying aox is that Criterion has misjudged the profitability of its titles 2/3's of the time, which is frankly ridiculous. I think that there have absolutely been cases where Criterion has released titles knowing perfectly well that they weren't going to turn a profit. If you want to be cynical about it, you could claim that this was to maintain the prestige of the brand. If you don't, then you can take into account the possibility that the folks at Criterion have some genuine appreciation for film history and the role that home video plays in it.

aox wrote:Your implication is a faulty application of logic. Just because there are titles in the collection that have lost or are losing money, doesn't prove that they were released as some altruistic film venture. There is no reason to believe CC has ever released a title they didn't think would be profitable.

I wasn't intending to "prove that they were released as some altrusitic film venture", nor did I imply that CC purposely released a title they didn't think would be profitable.

Many titles are released with pretty shaky or unimpressive sales projections, simply in the hope that they can be worked over a number of years into fine shape. Some work, many don't.

My point was, if it was "ENTIRELY about money" then many of these wouldn't even be attempted.

A great example of one that worked would be GREY GARDENS. A great example of one that didn't work very well would be GENERAL IDI AMIN DADA. I may be wrong about the latter, but MoC released both of these and IDI AMIN has been a big disappointment (despite THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND simul-release).

Fair enough. On a side note, and not to derail this any farther, where are we getting the 2/3rd's number?

I pulled it out the air. On reflection, I'd say that it's probably 1/3 or less for Criterion, and more like 2/3 or more for MoC. CC have way more big hitters.

Dr Amicus wrote:Oh, and although the cover has been .... controversial... elsewhere, my old Halliwell (1986 edition!) had a magnificent poster for this which was spectacularly 'wrong', pretending the film is a teen problem drama. If you can find a copy of this Nick, it's prime booklet material.

Even at the time of the film's 1937 UK release, Graham Greene commented on the gulf between its actual tone and Paramount's publicity:

Graham Greene wrote:... a sense of misery and inhumanity is left vibrating in the nerves. Anyhow that was how the story appeared to me, though Paramount describe it in these terms. "One of the Three Smart Girls goes a lot faster. She wants to taste the Thrills of Life itself. What Happens?"

It's especially odd to find Paramount referring to a rival studio's success: Barbara Read had also appeared in Universal's frothy musical-comedy Three Smart Girls (1936).

By the way, Leslie Halliwell compiled a book entirely devoted to Paramount posters and press book materials, Mountain of Dreams (1976).

Jonathan S wrote:[By the way, Leslie Halliwell compiled a book entirely devoted to Paramount posters and press book materials, Mountain of Dreams (1976).

Spookily, Leslie Halliwell also went to my old school, and ran the film club.

peerpee wrote:

Jonathan S wrote:[By the way, Leslie Halliwell compiled a book entirely devoted to Paramount posters and press book materials, Mountain of Dreams (1976).

Spookily, Leslie Halliwell also went to my old school, and ran the film club.

I assume he was a year or so above you.

I could have gone to that school too (also long after Halliwell) but chose not to, much to my parents' disgust! However, my cousin bought Halliwell's house from him...
His autobiography Seats in All Parts includes an entertaining account of his film-obsessed childhood.

Duncan Hopper wrote:I assume he was a year or so above you.

Yuss, approx 45 years above me.

Jonathan S wrote:I could have gone to that school too (also long after Halliwell) but chose not to, much to my parents' disgust!

How funny!
My interest in film was sparked there, when a fabulous history teacher (Mr. Whitten) showed us THE DRAUGHTSMAN'S CONTRACT twice over consecutive days. Hated it the first day, but loved it the second day after much explanation from Mr. Whitten, who sadly died far too young of pneumonia a couple of years ago. I also remember being shown Polanski's MACBETH in an English class, and that was pretty nuts for a 12 year old.

However, my cousin bought Halliwell's house from him...

How interesting, also in Lancashire?

His autobiography Seats in All Parts includes an entertaining account of his film-obsessed childhood.

I'll have to get to that. Haven't read it.
I remember when the Sixth Form Common Room was being refurbished in 1990/1 and they renovated a small side room / projection booth that seemed to date back decades, walls covered with posters, to make way for a crappy little canteen.

Specs are up, the video supplements seem to be replicated from the Criterion DVD (will they be in 1080p though?)

perkizitore wrote:supplements seem to be replicated from the Criterion DVD (will they be in 1080p though?)

I would think so. Criterion has filmed their video interviews in high def for some time now. I wonder if Criterion got something other than cash in return.

No windowboxing on this at all, or on the opening and closing credits either. We're signing it off this weekend and we're very happy with it! We've managed to claw back some time, we're not as down-to-the-wire as we have been this year -- so it will be on time (and so will ROCK HUNTER).

Do we know yet what the region-coding is?

Thought it was stated as Region B... Who was it that designated this? Criterion?

Has anyone received this? HMV shipped my copy today.

I got my copy, shipped directly from Eureka, yesterday.

Got mine from Eureka last Friday.

peerpee wrote:My interest in film was sparked there, when a fabulous history teacher (Mr. Whitten) showed us THE DRAUGHTSMAN'S CONTRACT twice over consecutive days. Hated it the first day, but loved it the second day after much explanation from Mr. Whitten, who sadly died far too young of pneumonia a couple of years ago. I also remember being shown Polanski's MACBETH in an English class, and that was pretty nuts for a 12 year old.

You and I share a lot in common, Nick...

While I have not seen The Draughtsman's Contract, I have recently seen and am now a big fan of The Cook the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover (Universal UK DVD), A Zed and Two Noughts (BFI BD)--my favorite so far-- and The Baby of Mâcon, which I hunted down the new Swedish BD of and was very...amazed.

Furthermore, I was also scarred by Roman Polanski's Macbeth as a child. I believe I was eleven years old, and I received a history assignment to select any film version of a Shakespeare play, then view the film and write about it. For whatever reason it came down to my babysitter (then in her 40s, with no children) to pick up my choice from the local video shop. She returned home, claiming in spite of a number of my suggested titles that Macbeth (1971) was "the only one they had". I was at first excited because the opening titles proclaimed it was co-produced by Playboy Enterprises, but that excitement quickly faded as that severed arm appeared on screen. Needless to say, after the film was over, I was horrified, and in the write-up I actually chastised my history teacher for mandating that kind of assignment, even though the film we saw in her class was Zefferelli's Romeo and Juliet...

Also, I am region-free and will be receiving the Make Way for Tomorrow MoC BD shortly, here in the USA. It will be my first viewing of the film and I'm very keen to get into it!

For future pressings for this title, or others just in case, the final Masters Of Cinema screen stating, "If you illegally copying this...." should be "If you are illegally copying this...." grammatically....

manicsounds wrote:For future pressings for this title, or others just in case, the final Masters Of Cinema screen stating, "If you illegally copying this...." should be "If you are illegally copying this...." grammatically....

Mine says "If you illegally copy this..."

imhotep wrote:

manicsounds wrote:For future pressings for this title, or others just in case, the final Masters Of Cinema screen stating, "If you illegally copying this...." should be "If you are illegally copying this...." grammatically....

Mine says "If you illegally copy this..."

Ah, it seems I read it wrong as the tears in my eyes distorted everything... my mistake!

I loved this film. And I couldn't disagree more with anyone who calls this "depressing". In fact the parents accept their "fate" with so much dignity that it's impossible to feel sorry for them. Instead, I felt sorry for their sons and daughters. They don't deserve their parents.
This movie should be in most AFI 100 lists (Films, Love Stories, Inspirational, Heroes and Villains) and I can't believe it was overlooked. Perhaps when they revisit their lists?