criterionforum.org

captveg wrote:I guess it could also mean that Fox is about to purchase the MGM film catalog outright. Fox would be the most logical buyer.

Surely we would hear about that in the press first. I imagine that Fox is either getting distribution credit or it was a mistake on the sell sheets.

Always thought that Fox distributed pretty much all of MGMs stuff for the last few years. So why wouldn't Fox's name be on the bottom?

manicsounds wrote:Always thought that Fox distributed pretty much all of MGMs stuff for the last few years. So why wouldn't Fox's name be on the bottom?

But it's no longer just distribution. Looks like they either own or control all the rights to the film. Considering their great relationship with Criterion, this could be potentially excellent news.

captveg wrote:I guess it could also mean that Fox is about to purchase the MGM film catalog outright. Fox would be the most logical buyer.

Do not jump to conclusions. The licensing deal for FUGITIVE KIND was made months before the consortium that owns MGM decided to put it up for sale, and the sale (with a dozen companies bidding) isn't even close to being concluded. Declaring Fox the "owner" is waaaaaay premature. They are the home video distributor, so they probably brokered the deal with MGM's o.k. I suspect the final packaging will have both the MGM and Fox logos.

Jameson281 wrote:Do not jump to conclusions.

Not jumping. Just dipping a toe in the water.

Why did MGM put the Richard Burton version of 1984 oop?

zachhh wrote:Why did MGM put the Richard Burton version of 1984 oop?

When you're billions of dollars in debt and can barely afford to keep your lights on, I don't think keeping the Richard Burton version of 1984 in print is a top priority. Just a guess.

Paths of Glory and The Killing are still in print but this last week MGM discontinued the DVD for Killer's Kiss. Not really sure if that makes it more likely that it may reappear via Criterion along with the other two or not.

the only reason i'm looking forward to the Straw Dogs remake this year is so that MGM will have a reason to hopefully re-release the now discontinued original.

If Criterion has access to the Goldwyn library, Street Scene (King Vidor) would seem like an obvious choice.

I've seen the list of titles. No Goldwyn films. No Bergman. No Truffaut.

At Film Forum last night, I overheard a Film Forum regular who consults for Criterion tell his seat mate that Criterion confirmed to him (earlier that afternoon) that they have secured rights for RED RIVER.

Please let that be true. Better still, let it be the first Hawks in 1080p. [-o<

kneelzod wrote:At Film Forum last night, I overheard a Film Forum regular who consults for Criterion tell his seat mate that Criterion confirmed to him (earlier that afternoon) that they have secured rights for RED RIVER.

It sure sounds like they were given a very broad spectrum to choose from in the MGM catalog, and I've heard that they may have grabbed up to two dozen titles, so they'd be nuts if Red River wasn't among them.

Mr Finch wrote:Please let that be true. Better still, let it be the first Hawks in 1080p. [-o<

Too late. That honor goes to Rio Bravo. It would, however, be the first Criterion release of any Hawks film on any format.

Let's hope this is true. I'd also be great if Criterion would include the previous "narrator" version as well as Hawk's original "journal" version. The Kevin McDonald documentary would be a terrific supplement as well.

I wish Criterion would release a Blu-ray of Otto Preminger's film Exodus restored from 65mm elements.

Perhaps the MGM dealings might bring some old OOP titles back? Straw Dogs (which I just bought, so Criterion has more incentive) and Sid and Nancy come to mind. Aren't the three Hitchcock OOPs also MGM?

Rebecca, Spellbound and Notorious are all still in print. So is the MGM Hitchcock box. Criterion would not be able to license Straw Dogs because it's not an MGM title. It is owned by the Walt Disney Company who has licensed the ABC and Selznick library to MGM. It seems highly unlikely they would be able to third party license any of those films.

Sid and Nancy was licensed to Criterion by Orion but it was actually produced by the Samuel Goldwyn Company. Since MGM owns both companies, I'm sure they let the rights expire from the Orion catalog and let the film revert to the Goldwyn. I think someone earlier in this thread said that Criterion didn't have any Goldwyn titles and that they would require additional approval/royalties/paperwork etc. I think it's more likely that Criterion will try and license a batch of Goldwyn only titles at some point down the road.

Who knows, maybe MGM won't be able to afford to renew the license on the ABC/Selznick library and those titles could feasibly be within Criterion's reach again.

Are there any other huge titles from MGM that Criterion has shown interest in before?

Haha, maybe they'll upgrade the Bond laserdiscs, slanderous commentaries and all.

matrixschmatrix wrote:Are there any other huge titles from MGM that Criterion has shown interest in before?

Haha, maybe they'll upgrade the Bond laserdiscs, slanderous commentaries and all.

I'm thinking Last Tango in Paris has a chance somewhere down the line, along with Burn I hope. I know over on Facebook they said they had no plans to re-release Sid and Nancy, but I hope they change there minds because I'd love to have it on Blu.

matrixschmatrix wrote:Are there any other huge titles from MGM that Criterion has shown interest in before?

Haha, maybe they'll upgrade the Bond laserdiscs, slanderous commentaries and all.

Woody Allen films [-o<

ShellOilJunior wrote:

matrixschmatrix wrote:Are there any other huge titles from MGM that Criterion has shown interest in before?

Haha, maybe they'll upgrade the Bond laserdiscs, slanderous commentaries and all.

Woody Allen films [-o<

the first bluray eclipse set.

I would settle for an anamorphic Annie Hall.

I would settle for Interiors without the layers of grime.

The Long Goodbye?