criterionforum.org

Is anyone else not so much upset about the specific movies but rather upset that they are only releasing two per month now?

They will announce more i'm sure.

justeleblanc wrote:Is anyone else not so much upset about the specific movies but rather upset that they are only releasing two per month now?

Yeah. I noticed that everyone is bitching about the recent catalog selection, something that none of us can do anything about it. I'm more depressed about the recent lack of releases. Give a break, only two new titles in July. Last year, I believe there were four releases in July, but the fact that Criterion is sitting on so many great titles is beneath me. Will the Exterminating Angel, Simon of the Desert, The Milky Way, etc just to name a list of great titles by one of my favorite directors ever be release? The answer my friend is blowing in the wind.

I was trying to make a serious effort, admittedly with flaws, to figure out what people's tastes were for the DVDs. However, instead of helping, you go around moaning and complaining. If you could have proved the titles in question were sure money makers, my arguement would have been over. Instead, you chose to whine. Shame Sad

The response to Dazed & Confused and Equinox has been lukewarm. Of the six people I got to respond to my previous post, only one, Tribe, has said he will buy Equinox. Even Gregory, who has gone out his way to attack people when they dare claim Equinox is not that good of a title, has not committed to buy it. My point being, if it doesn't look like it has artistic or commercial potential, why should Criterion put it out there? I found two reviews on it:

http://www.scifilm.org/reviews/equinox.html

http://www.moria.co.nz/horror/equinox70.htm

Both of them agree it is a camp classic. However, in both reviews they say EQUINOX is a really bad movie. I couldn't find any other reviews. Maybe Andrew Sarris loved it and put Jack Woods in the patheon of great directors. However, why should people commit $40 dollars to a camp classic when they can get one of those big 10 movie box sets of similar titles for like $10-$20?

With all the bitching and moaning on this board, none of the supporters of Equinox have given us any reason why it should be in Criterion other than it's Criterion's right to do what ever it wants. Us who critize are sticking it to the man!!! Very Happy You sqares are just standing up for a corporation. You want people who have already forked over their hard earned pay for two editions of Dazed & Confused and spend $40 on a third one. Shame on you!!! Sad

If Criterion were to release Breathless, how many people honestly would say "Another Godard film! They have too many of those already!" No, people would jump for joy. If they finally released the Eisenstein silent box set, how many would say "They already have released a box set of his!" No, these are title people would run to get. They would make a lot more money than Equinox or a third edition of Dazed & Confused. Also, it would earn them a lot more respect.

So, while my arguement may have flaws, it is sure better than your own little "you are just being a bunch of snobs." No. We who are complaining are the ones who are willing to put are money where our mouth is. If Criterion released Double Indemnity or Open City, I would actually buy it. I know I am not the only one to do this. So, those who complain, put your money where your mouth is. Commit to buying these titles you so gallently defend. Or, provide us with evidence there are tons of people who want these titles. Otherwise, shut up!!!

I'm also a little confused why JM no longer answers his mail.

Common guys. Stop it please!!! Get over it. Criterion will still be Criterion no matter how many Equinox, Kokos they'll release. Let's move on, and discuss some films.

It borders on retarded to pretend to understand what titles will sell better than others, but I think it's a safe bet that D&C will sell quite well, not only to the dvdtalk "must buy every edition because i'm insane" crew, but also the kids just graduating from college and finding themselves with some disposable income for the first time.

But really, this is all conjecture, and I think it's pointless to try to get into the heads of the business people at CC. Let's talk about movies.

"How many people out there are planning to buy Dazed and Confused, Equinox, Yi Yi, and/or Koko: A Talking Gorilla?"

I will. I have every Criterion since like the 230's because I'm an idiot.

oldsheperd wrote:"How many people out there are planning to buy Dazed and Confused, Equinox, Yi Yi, and/or Koko: A Talking Gorilla?"

I will. I have every Criterion since like the 230's because I'm an idiot.

Well Old Shep, from spine 230 - up is probably the best part of the entire collection. So, basically you're not an idiot.

I'll buy Dazed & Confused, Equinox, and Yi Yi. I doubt I'll buy KoKo, but I may rent it. I don't own every Criterion. I only choose to pay for the ones I'm interested in.

I still have no clue how the decision of a consumer whether or not to purchase a product from a company does not effect the company's bottom-line. I'm also confused as to how personal micro-economics have no effect on a macro-economic model (they might only have a minute effect, but the two are still related in some fashion, otherwise the macro-economic model is useless).

With all the bitching and moaning on this board, none of the supporters of Equinox have given us any reason why it should be in Criterion other than it's Criterion's right to do what ever it wants.

I believe in the Equinox forum I stated tha it help pave the way for new filmmakers and new technologies. Camp classic or not, it's an important film... This is what Criterion is here for... To release IMPORTANT films be they for the reason of cinema, technology, or director... For some reason Criterion finds them to be important and they release it. Personally I'd rather have a collection full of variety than a collection full of 60s foreign films and 90s color blasted art house pics (Not that there's anything wrong with those...)

The fact is, any collection needs variety. Criterion supplies this variety.

I mentioned the 3 per month problem up earlier (not even counting the "reissue" problem), but it seemed to get lost in the argument. Since someone else brought it up, let's get back to it.
April - 3, May - 3, June - 3, July - 3 (announced).

Maybe we should switch the focus to this, since it used to be four.

Equinox is a piece of shit, but unfortunately it may sell well, (as someone was mentioning it may not). It appeals to fanboy horror junkies who like this kind of crap, and they are a big, big crowd of nerds who like to buy and own collector's edition DVDs of crap (you know, the people with four versions of Army of Darkness/Evil Dead box sets) .
In short, it has big "crossover potential."

I still maintain (having seen it) that it is a complete and utter piece of crap with no artistic merit. (See my post somewhere in the Equinox thread if you want more elaborate discussion.)

Anyway, but back to the 3 per month problem! Unfortunately us bitching here won't do any good, but let's just be sad together about it.

Maybe the fellow up earlier who mentioned it might be a result of their move is correct (or the Image Entertainment entanglement). And like I said in my earlier post, I think they'll have a month where they release 50 or 100 titles just to make up for all this silliness. Bank on it!

P.S. - Didn't meant to disparage the Evil Dead films. But you know, the three or four versions of those films they own are often side-by-side with a lot of other serious crap in any horror fanboys' home collection.

Andre Jurieu wrote:I still have no clue how the decision of a consumer whether or not to purchase a product from a company does not effect the company's bottom-line. I'm also confused as to how personal micro-economics have no effect on a macro-economic model (they might only have a minute effect, but the two are still related in some fashion, otherwise the macro-economic model is useless).

"I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you've probably misunderstood what I've said." --Alan Greenspan

Well, I don't own a single version of an Evil Dead/Army of Darkness box-set, and I'm still going to buy Equinox.

I only see dos for July with the exception of the Olivier stuff.

Good grief, Andre! You'd be MUCH better spending money buying a copy of one of the Evil Dead films than Equinox!

But if you want to watch a film without any artistic interest whatsoever that has special FX that are without interest, go ahead.

Maybe some consider the FX appealing as a fawning fanboy tribute to Ray Harryhausen, but then again watching an original Harryhausen would probably be more rewarding. Perhaps it's interesting that mere students or however young they were did this by themselves, but the fact that they succeeded in making such a load of crap sends the level of interest declining precipitously.

Damn it! I intended to hold back on Equinox and save that for the Equinox thread! Sorry.

oldsheperd wrote:I only see dos for July with the exception of the Olivier stuff.

Es cierto, donde esta el tercer titulo?

gigimonagas wrote:

oldsheperd wrote:I only see dos for July with the exception of the Olivier stuff.

Es cierto, donde esta el tercer titulo?

They briefly had the Olivier Shakespeare box set up, containing the 3 previously released Olivier titles merely packaged together, as a July release, but then it went down again.

gigimonagas wrote:

oldsheperd wrote:I only see dos for July with the exception of the Olivier stuff.

Es cierto, donde esta el tercer titulo?

I thought it was going to be Kicking & Screaming.

But regardless of July, which is too early to complain about, we still have 3 solid months of only 3 titles each already in the bag to commiserate about.

justeleblanc wrote:

gigimonagas wrote:

oldsheperd wrote:I only see dos for July with the exception of the Olivier stuff.

Es cierto, donde esta el tercer titulo?

I thought it was going to be Kicking & Screaming.

Well, if Kicking & Screaming happens to get release a July release, it'll still be 3 titles.

pzman84 wrote:However, instead of helping, you go around moaning and complaining. If you could have proved the titles in question were sure money makers, my arguement would have been over.

I did answer the question, so no need to shame me for not putting my shoulder to the wheel. Anyway, your argument was over before it started because it's impossible for any of us to prove that. I'm not sure what your statistical criteria were (valid or otherwise) but I'm pretty sure most people who responded to the question said they were planning to buy at least two of the four.
I'm not just complaining about others' comments, I'm trying to lay out the ways in which they're logically flawed or unclear. That's part of any worthwhile discussion when there is a difference of opinion.

pzman84 wrote:Even Gregory, who has gone out his way to attack people when they dare claim Equinox is not that good of a title, has not committed to buy it.

I didn't "attack" anyone or make any personal remarks against anyone. I was trying to urge people to say something interesting -- some sort of explanation of why it's not a good film -- instead of just griping that Criterion is releasing it with no indication of why they shouldn't. An actual discussion of Equinox would be of far more value than page after page of "This movie sucks"; "No it doesn't"; "Yes it does." But writing a decent criticism of a film isn't easy; "whinging into the void" is. Whether or not I'm buying it is irrelevant (for reasons I've also explained fully). It would be impossible, pointless and silly for me to offer a criticism or even just complain about the fact it'll be in the collection -- because I've never seen it and don't have anything to say about it. That hasn't stopped others, of course.

pzman84 wrote:Heaven help us! I was just trying (unscientifically, of course) to see how many people would buy the titles in question. I am sorry if "these kinds of titles" offended people. I thought I was whining and bitching when I was posting things.

Ya know what, fuck it! All Gregory, ben d banana, kinjitsu, and Antoine Doinel want to do is bitch and whine. I was trying to make a serious effort, admittedly with flaws, to figure out what people's tastes were for the DVDs. However, instead of helping, you go around moaning and complaining. If you could have proved the titles in question were sure money makers, my arguement would have been over. Instead, you chose to whine. Shame

Aren't you the one who is bitching? Last I checked, all the people whose names you mentioned are responding with calm, collected answers - far from the "Ya know what, fuck it!" you're tossing out for the sake of being tough.

How are they exactly supposed to PROVE these titles will sell? Are they part of Criterion's marketing division? Do they hold paperwork containing what expected sales figures are?

The response to Dazed & Confused and Equinox has been lukewarm. Of the six people I got to respond to my previous post, only one, Tribe, has said he will buy Equinox. Even Gregory, who has gone out his way to attack people when they dare claim Equinox is not that good of a title, has not committed to buy it. My point being, if it doesn't look like it has artistic or commercial potential, why should Criterion put it out there? I found two reviews on it:

http://www.scifilm.org/reviews/equinox.html

http://www.moria.co.nz/horror/equinox70.htm

Both of them agree it is a camp classic. However, in both reviews they say EQUINOX is a really bad movie. I couldn't find any other reviews. Maybe Andrew Sarris loved it and put Jack Woods in the patheon of great directors. However, why should people commit $40 dollars to a camp classic when they can get one of those big 10 movie box sets of similar titles for like $10-$20?

The response has been lukewarm? Wow, you're using an INTERNET FORUM to gauge sales interest. Much like the person who said that the release of Dazed and Confused is timed with graduation, I'm sure there are tons of teenagers/young adults who will pick this title up. I know in fact FIVE people who really just care about the mainstream side of the Collection, that being stuff like Wes Anderson and the forthcoming Kicking & Screaming, all of which have expressed their plans to purchase this new D&C edition.

I love how you're opinion on Equinox is gauged by that of reviews you've read, as opposed to seeing the film for yourself, so how can you truly gauge artisitic/commercial potential? For $40, people who're buying Equinox are getting TWO versions of the film and a ton of extras - something those cheap $10-$20 sets won't be giving collectors and/or fans.

Hell, with all this ridiculousness, I hereby am pledging $40 to purchase Equinox for the sake of doing so. That's putting my money where my mouth is.

With all the bitching and moaning on this board, none of the supporters of Equinox have given us any reason why it should be in Criterion other than it's Criterion's right to do what ever it wants. Us who critize are sticking it to the man!!! You sqares are just standing up for a corporation. You want people who have already forked over their hard earned pay for two editions of Dazed & Confused and spend $40 on a third one. Shame on you!!!

Nobody is telling anybody what to do with their money. Considering the prior two releases of D&C were lackluster and will also still be available upon release of the Criterion, doesn't that setting take on current business models where we are offered either the single-disc barebones edition or the two-disc special edition? Sure looks that way to me.

If Criterion were to release Breathless, how many people honestly would say "Another Godard film! They have too many of those already!" No, people would jump for joy. If they finally released the Eisenstein silent box set, how many would say "They already have released a box set of his!" No, these are title people would run to get. They would make a lot more money than Equinox or a third edition of Dazed & Confused. Also, it would earn them a lot more respect.

So Criterion should only have my respect if all they release is classics of world cinema? I guess the 108 DVDs I've bought from them are worthless in light of these "lesser" works of cinema. I'd buy Breathless, the Eisenstein set AND Equinox for that matter. Perhaps I'm losing respect for mixing essentials with popcorn.

So, while my arguement may have flaws, it is sure better than your own little "you are just being a bunch of snobs." No. We who are complaining are the ones who are willing to put are money where our mouth is. If Criterion released Double Indemnity or Open City, I would actually buy it. I know I am not the only one to do this. So, those who complain, put your money where your mouth is. Commit to buying these titles you so gallently defend. Or, provide us with evidence there are tons of people who want these titles. Otherwise, shut up!!!

The only thing your argument has is the banter of an 8-year-old who dropped his ice cream cone. I can put my money where my mouth is. And I'll be sure to get you evidence of sales figures at the end of the year.

pzman84 wrote: Ya know what, fuck it! All Gregory, ben d banana, kinjitsu, and Antoine Doinel want to do is bitch and whine. I was trying to make a serious effort, admittedly with flaws, to figure out what people's tastes were for the DVDs. However, instead of helping, you go around moaning and complaining.

And you guys fucked it up. I hope you can sleep tonight.

Tribe

backstreetsbackalright wrote: To a certain degree, that's a question of canon more than of merit. Only time will tell if Yang will be added to that shortlist in undergraduate film appreciation classes. And it's difficult to say from a distance of under ten years if Yi Yi ranks with such a class (which is altogether discounting the fairly arbitrary exercise of anointing an elite auteur class in the first place [which isn't to say it's something I don't think about constantly]). Far as Yang's complete body of work, I think most of us on the Forum (zedz obviously excluded) haven't had the opportunity to see much of Yang's work. Having only seen Yi Yi, I can't possibly say I know if I consider Yang of such a caliber.

Well it's been about twenty years since Taipei Story and The Terrorizer, and I consider Yang the greatest living director, easily a match for the cliquey canons that other posters have been trotting out. All of the films I've seen of his improve steadily with repeat viewings, so a good quality DVD release of Yi Yi is expremely important news. This, along with the Pialat, should be a benchmark release for Criterion, signalling what I hope will be a new engagement with contemporary world cinema.

Today's Bergmans and Kurosawas are out there, but cinema culture has been so backward-looking for so long that the genuine modern masters are relegated to obscurity (hence the ignorant "lower tier" comments above - it's not really someone's fault if they've never heard of Yang, given the woeful state of his catalogue in the West).

What's been missed in the latest flurry of spleen is that the dissatisfaction with Criterion's releases this year (at least from me and several others - though there are certainly plenty of generic haters) has much more to do with the volume of releases than with their individual quality. A month with only two, or even three, releases used to be a real oddity, as did releases of films already available in good transfers. (I guess this month they couldn't secure the rights to GiGi to go along with KoKo and YiYi)

(Edit: In my speed to defend Edward Yang's honour, I posted this last para before I came across the several posts that raised the same point!)