criterionforum.org

I've heard that the new line is the Blue Ray criterion collection.

I've also heard that they are not producing any new DVD spine numbers and discontinuing production on all existing DVD's.

My last post was a facetious lie.

One would never guess...

justeleblanc wrote:I forgot who the person was, but there was definately someone claiming to be an inside man on the eclipse line who would post in this forum. And I think that person also claimed that equinox was gonna be an eclipse title.

This chap/chapette?

n. w. wrote:

justeleblanc wrote:I forgot who the person was, but there was definately someone claiming to be an inside man on the eclipse line who would post in this forum. And I think that person also claimed that equinox was gonna be an eclipse title.

This chap/chapette?

I think it was aslphalt jungle, but I might be wrong. I thought we all got mad at him because he couldn't talk about the new Eclipse info.

Did he dissappear and become someone else?

Derek Estes wrote:I think the logo looks more like an incomplete lower case E than a wacky C.

agreed. although i do believe there is still see a C in it. Eclipse and Criterion in the same logo.
dunno about the minimalist black and white for cult films. colors might be more appropriate. but will see what the design for the label before jumping on it.
i have faith :)

With the talk of why or why not "Equinox" isn't going to be one of the flagship Eclipse titles, I'm thinking Criterion could use its release as a promotion for the new cult line. It's coming out in late June, around the time the September releases are being announced. As September was also being bandied around for a launch date for Eclipse, the timing would work out well.

I figure it's like those weekends when a cable network preempts its normal programming, to give a preview of shows from a sister network (like when USA Network had blocks of shows from Bravo or Trio; or when MTV has a weekend of all one style of music from its satellite channels). "Equinox" would be a perfect film to package with the first Eclipse catalog, alongside a standard Criterion catalog.

Just a hunch, but it sorta makes sense.

-BJ

lull wrote:agreed. although i do believe there is still see a C in it. Eclipse and Criterion in the same logo.

That's an interesting idea. Using the same 'C' design for eClipse and Criterion Collection. It would certainly make sense of the "New look, new line" comment.

Buttery Jeb wrote:With the talk of why or why not "Equinox" isn't going to be one of the flagship Eclipse titles, I'm thinking Criterion could use its release as a promotion for the new cult line..."Equinox" would be a perfect film to package with the first Eclipse catalog, alongside a standard Criterion catalog.

Again, more good solid sense. What's happening around here today?

One possible reason Equinox is not going to be released on the new line could be that they only secured the rights for a limited time and didn't want to put it on hold while they finish preparations for Eclipse. I'm not trying to start a rumor that Equinox is going out of print (not that that would be a very harmful rumor) but it is one possible explanation.

lull wrote:Eclipse and Criterion in the same logo.

This thought crossed my mind as well. What if both lines are part of Criterion as we know it today? Criterion has plenty of B-films already in the library, so maybe they figured they might as well keep giving these films spine numbers (Equinox), but give this part of Criterion a surname. This way, they can release films they are famous for as well as the quirky titles that they love to release, all without taking away from each other.

Gregory wrote:One possible reason Equinox is not going to be released on the new line could be that they only secured the rights for a limited time and didn't want to put it on hold while they finish preparations for Eclipse. I'm not trying to start a rumor that Equinox is going out of print (not that that would be a very harmful rumor) but it is one possible explanation.

It doesn't make sense that they'd sit on it for a good five years if they only had limited rights to it.

They said they hoped to release it way back then but I didn't know that they actually held the rights all this time. But yes you're probably right.

I am unclear about how Criterion intends to segment films between the two brand-names. I am not sure what is the definition of a "Cult" film. Can "Salo" be considered a "cult" film? If so, given two separate recent teasers from Criterion, I would think "Salo" could be the inaugural DVD under the new rubric. If it is not considered a "cult" film, why not? I would suggest that for Criterion to create a separate brand and unmistakably link it to their existing image (as the logo design suggests), they have to have some rigorous criteria (!) for inclusion. Cult items by definition polarize the audience, however for inclusion under a Criterion line extension they have to also have a kind of "classic" status. "Salo" and "El Topo" in my view meet these dual criteria. The danger is that they start issuing polarizing films that have not achieved (for the lack of a better word) a "classic" status. That could dilute their brand image. The history of consumer marketing is full of powerful brand names diluted through poorly conceived line extensions. Those who do not learn from history re-live it.

kekid wrote:Cult items by definition polarize the audience, however for inclusion under a Criterion line extension they have to also have a kind of "classic" status. "Salo" and "El Topo" in my view meet these dual criteria.

Neither Salo or El Topo meet these criteria. Both are undisputed classics. If anything, Dazed & Confused meets it, as it was so misunderstood upon its release. Today, D&C is a staple of every single trailerpark rental agency in Texas. All our kids see it, and it's making us better people.

Narshty wrote: It doesn't make sense that they'd sit on it for a good five years if they only had limited rights to it.

<tangent alert> ouch! Lee was really stickin' it to Fox Lorber back in 2000! Was it because Fox Lorber took the Woo rights away? Or was there something else? </tangent alert>

kekid wrote:I am unclear about how Criterion intends to segment films between the two brand-names. I am not sure what is the definition of a "Cult" film. Can "Salo" be considered a "cult" film? If so, given two separate recent teasers from Criterion, I would think "Salo" could be the inaugural DVD under the new rubric. If it is not considered a "cult" film, why not? I would suggest that for Criterion to create a separate brand and unmistakably link it to their existing image (as the logo design suggests), they have to have some rigorous criteria (!) for inclusion. Cult items by definition polarize the audience, however for inclusion under a Criterion line extension they have to also have a kind of "classic" status. "Salo" and "El Topo" in my view meet these dual criteria. The danger is that they start issuing polarizing films that have not achieved (for the lack of a better word) a "classic" status. That could dilute their brand image. The history of consumer marketing is full of powerful brand names diluted through poorly conceived line extensions. Those who do not learn from history re-live it.

Remember, Salo already has a spine #.

Langlois68 wrote:

kekid wrote:Cult items by definition polarize the audience, however for inclusion under a Criterion line extension they have to also have a kind of "classic" status. "Salo" and "El Topo" in my view meet these dual criteria.

Neither Salo or El Topo meet these criteria. Both are undisputed classics. If anything, Dazed & Confused meets it, as it was so misunderstood upon its release. Today, D&C is a staple of every single trailerpark rental agency in Texas. All our kids see it, and it's making us better people.

Dazed & Confused and El Topo/Salo - the former is stacked with beautiful, young Hollywood actors and wasn't "misunderstood" as much as it didn't find its audience until it hit home video and cable. The definition of "cult" isn't the ability to polarize an audience so much as court a very marginal one - El Topo/Salo fits that criteria to a T.

Wasn't there a rumor floating around earlier this year that Criterion and Abkco had come to an agreement to bring Jodorowsky to DVD? But then again Allen Klein is a maniac and I wouldn't be surprised if he scuttled any deal that may have been even close to being in place.

Langlois68 wrote:

kekid wrote:Cult items by definition polarize the audience, however for inclusion under a Criterion line extension they have to also have a kind of "classic" status. "Salo" and "El Topo" in my view meet these dual criteria.

Neither Salo or El Topo meet these criteria. Both are undisputed classics. If anything, Dazed & Confused meets it, as it was so misunderstood upon its release. Today, D&C is a staple of every single trailerpark rental agency in Texas. All our kids see it, and it's making us better people.

Dazed & Confused and El Topo/Salo aren't comporable at all - the former is stacked with beautiful, young Hollywood actors and wasn't "misunderstood" as much as it didn't find its audience until it hit home video and cable. The definition of "cult" isn't the ability to polarize an audience so much as court a very marginal one - El Topo/Salo fits that criteria to a T.

Wasn't there a rumor floating around earlier this year that Criterion and Abkco had come to an agreement to bring Jodorowsky to DVD? But then again knowing Allen Klein's reputation, I wouldn't be surprised if he scuttled any deal that may have been even close to being in place.

Absolutely hilarious thread over at Twitch - and you'd think we're mental over here...

http://www.twitchfilm.net/archives/005691.html#comments

Annie Mall wrote:Absolutely hilarious thread over at Twitch - and you'd think we're mental over here...

http://www.twitchfilm.net/archives/005691.html#comments

amateurs over there...but I love the whole spin on "Criterion must hate the Chinese" tangent. That was fun. Cool to watch the snowball grow and grow. Particularly worth reading are the 'glenn' posts: Ooooh oooh...just bought my first malata...you guys suck.

I'm faux-bourgeois :(

The Twitchfilm thread was insane! Hilarious yeah, but how can they go on all day about Criterion? Do they have more members or are they just obsessed? Mental was just about the right word used to describe the thread

The Fanciful Norwegian wrote:I'm faux-bourgeois

I know it stings, we've all felt that (I remember the first time I was called faux-bourgeois and how I cried for weeks in my room). But in the end, you'll be alright, eh

I am just faux. An inauthentic non-entity. With shoes and a bad, £5.75 haircut.

Back on the subject of the logo... It kind of looks like a capital E could fit in the open spot on the C... Maybe that is the logo for Eclipse... Cause it's like the E is Eclipsing the C... Just a thought.