Criterion Blu-ray

[El Manchego]

I might be making this up but I recall a post in the last few months saying that there was no real requirement for BR discs to actually use the logos and the blue cases. Is it just me or does someone actually have information on this?

[Gigi M.]

I'm surprise no one hasn't brought up if MoC would go Blu also.

It seems as though Mad Detective is going to be MoC's first Blu-Ray release.

Nice.

I think is time for a new Blu Ray subforum. Let's make it a vote!!!

[codam]

I might be making this up but I recall a post in the last few months saying that there was no real requirement for BR discs to actually use the logos and the blue cases. Is it just me or does someone actually have information on this?

Earlier in this thread:

Is the BluRay packaging a requirement for people who produce the format? I would imagine that this may be holding Criterion back until they have free reign on the design (that won't be impeded by the blue strip at the top) and can identify their hi-def line the way they want to.

I asked Sony exactly this last week and was happy to discover that the horrible "blu" case with rounded edges and embossed "blu-ray" logo is not mandatory.

[s.j. bagley]

i don't see any real reason not to use a spine number system.

there are, in fact, quite a number of criterion collectors out there that value it and do blind buy simply based on whether or not it has a spine number.

and, really, it's not like it somehow magically detracts from the end product with its numerical wizardry, so i'm not really sure why anyone would really be opposed to it.

as to blu ray and criterion in general, i think it's wonderful news.
it's a noticeably superior format and i think it's great that hey aren't pricing them higher than the sd versions (and for those that complain about that, it's absurd to think that the sd versions are now some machievellian scheme to fund the nefarious technomage revolution. think about it his way- a 2 disc sd edition will be coming on a single bd disc. the cost evens out somewhat, that way, no?)

i also have to say that, since a good number of bd supporters are av geeks who normally wouldn't give any sort of foreign film (unless stuff blows up real good) the proverbial time of day on sd, it's nice to think that a company like criterion may expand a few horizons and at least get some of those folks to be interested in films that they normally wouldn't.
it's a great idea all around, and i really can't see a single down side to it.

[colinr0380]

Interesting but in a way it is a shame that they aren't pricing the Blu-Ray discs at more than standard DVDs. I can see why - to encourage people to test their discs out - but in some ways it would be good to see HD paying for the standard DVD Criterion line to diversify into different territory while people get excited about Hi-Def spectacle of The Last Emperor or pristine, pause-able Agutter and Bardot nudity! (I could already make out the outline of Bardot's bikini bottoms imprinted on her skin during Contempt's opening nude scene on the DVD so I'm actually a little scared at what else I might see in higher def!)

I am a little worried about Criterion stretching themselves too thinly and diluting the main line with (albeit welcomed) offshoots during the transition from one format to another. What was the break like from Laserdisc to DVD? Was there much of an overlap there? Will there be casualties of trying to juggle Eclipse and standard and hi-def Criterion discs (especially if they decide to include different extras or exclusives for one format or the other). Will it involve more work on fewer projects?

I agree though that this announcement was the only thing that really could make me consider Blu-Ray and while I'm not going to be upgrading any time soon these titles will be placed on the 'to buy' list when I eventually do take the plunge, along with the Kubrick set.

It was a good move though to announce the one film that I'd kill for in HD, Contempt. Well played Criterion - well...played! *leans back in chair, cool exterior masking worries about how on earth he'll find a region free Blu-Ray player and be able to pay for it before October*

[s.j. bagley]

oh, and a personal note on the spine numbers... it would be nice (for the sake of organisation) if they kept the same number system, with a modification (as i think was suggested earlier in this thread, for example- 'the seven samurai' 1-b.)

[colinr0380]

I'd agree, keep the spine numbers. Not that they're too important organisationally (I don't have a long enough shelf to store them that way!) but they do look nice and give a sense of a wider building collection in which every title is given equal weight and consideration!

(and spine no. 36 was The Wages of Fear!)

[s.j. bagley]

looking at the ld titles that haven't yet made it into the dvd collection, it seems that he bulk of the exclusions may be due simply to rights issues, since it seems like most have seen other dvd releases, already.
i imagine that won't be that big a problem transitioning from sd to bd since a good number of studios seem rather reluctant to revisit a lot of their 'classic' films in hd, likely leaving the door open for criterion to carry over or renegotiate the licenses.

[PillowRock]

Will there be casualties of trying to juggle Eclipse and standard and hi-def Criterion discs (especially if they decide to include different extras or exclusives for one format or the other). Will it involve more work on fewer projects?

I wouldn't expect that to be a problem, largely because I don't expect Criterion to do the different extras for different formats thing.

For one thing, that is not the precedent that have set in their initial announcement where it explicitly states that the extras will be same as the existing editions.

I would expect roll out of BD titles to move pretty quickly and with little or no impact on new title development ...... for as long as they are putting out BD versions of movies where the SD versions already were described as "mastered in HD". As long as they are doing those, it's really just the printing / manufacturing schedules and costs ..... and those are comparatively small, and don't impact their development staff. For the 2 disk SD editions there may be a tiny amount of re-authoring in the top level menu to combine all of the content into one disk. I would think that was very minor, though.

Once they run out of titles that are already mastered in HD, *then* the reissues of those titles may start to look like the effort went into the new release of The Third Man ...... unless they can get new HD telecines from someone else and then attach their existing extras. That is the point when choices will have to be made about putting effort into new titles or BD versions of old titles. I don't think that will happen for a while yet, though.

[Darth Lavender]

While I'm not sure about licensing, cost of individual disks, etc. As far as actual 'work' is concerned, I imagine the SD version takes a good deal more effort than the Bluray. Once a High Def Telecine is created, it's (relatively) minor issue to compress that with MPEG4 and put it on a Bluray disk. Were, I think, a big part of Criterion's manpower is directed, is in trying to create an NTSC MPEG2 transfer that looks as sharp and film-like as possible.

As for extras, I do wonder if we'll be seeing some diversity in later releases. 2-Disk SDs vs 1-Disk Blurays being the most obvious example. I wonder if there'll also be cases of PiP features on the Bluray, presented as a documentary or something on the SD. This is all just 'distant future' hypothesising, though. I'm thinking we might eventually start to see something like Warner's Matrix releases, were the HDDVD included in a 'picture in picture' track consisting entirely of footage from the various documentaries on the SD. Basically no 'new' extras, but slightly different presentation taking advantage of the format's capabilities... Of course, all that is severely limited by Bluray itself. With the current players, I don't think the Bluray can offer anything more advanced (in special features) than a well authored DVD...

Anyway, I'm excited as all heck. And, with the order of that list, I'm going to get my hopes up that "The Man Who Fell To Earth" (probably my most anticipated of the upcoming HDs) will be among the October releases.

Meanwhile, all this talk about Contempt has me thinking it's high time I finally watch my standard definition DVD (couldn't care less about Bardot's bikini-line, but a classic is a classic and it's time I gave Godard another shot)

[editman]

Speaking of The Man Who Fell to Earth, it'll be interesting to see if the blu-ray version will come with the novel, and how it'll be package, if and only if CC blu-ray are going to be packaged differently from SD counterparts.

Then again, there's the whole catch-22 issue: if BD comes with the book, then those who upgrade the title will wind up with two copies of the same book; if it doesn't, those who have been holding off will miss out on that particular supplement that only's available on the SD version - oh the dilemma. #-o

As for why the spine number should be abolished, as much as it's useful in pulling cash out of compulsive blind-buyers to some extent (bless those poor souls who shelled out 20k plus & lots of shelf space just to have a complete set of numbered spine), having a spine number no longer have much practical use.

Fox copied it and that gimmick wore out its novelty fast, they don't even use put numbers on the spine of their Collector's Edition or Studio Classics anymore (ASAIK). (Re-phrased the above sentence, so that people would hopefully understand what my point is.)

The spine number may slightly help in lining up one's CC on the shelf, but I doubt anyone can easily find a title among 440 spines without looking up which is which, even if they're all sitting neatly on the shelf. Sure, some like The Honeymoon Killers or Steve Zissou are easier to find than the other with a neat spine number. Try to find Onibaba without looking. Who would have thought she's sitting between Tunes of Glory & Le corbeau?

Then it gets complicated with re-releases: how should one line up two or three of the same spine, eg The 400 Blows? Should one put the re-releases at the back? Should you line them up according to the date of issue, so it goes like first release, box set, stand-alone re-release? Should you put the box set between by Brakhage and The White Sheik , and have #5 oddly standing out in the box?

Then if you don't line them up by number, the spine number becomes a foreboding eyesore that almost forbids mixing CC with your other video titles, particularly those OOP titles which get re-released by other studios. Robocop, The Silence of Lambs comes in mind.

It's just a useless number. In the laserdisc days, when re-issues are way less often than as it is now, a spine number makes the Collection neat. Now, it's actually making it more disorganized.

[PillowRock]

I think, a big part of Criterion's manpower is directed, is in trying to create an NTSC MPEG2 transfer that looks as sharp and film-like as possible.

I would have guessed that the biggest chunk of their man-hours would be spent upstream of that ..... on the restorations, production of new extras, subtitling of both features and extras (such as for the episodes of "It's Wonderful to Create" on the Kurosawa's), etc.

[PillowRock]

Fox <snip> don't even use a numbering system anymore (ASAIK).

Virtually everybody who makes *any* kind of product uses some form of product numbering system, if only for internal accounting purposes.

[fdm]

how should one line up two or three of the same spine, eg The 400 Blows? Should one put the re-releases at the back? Should you line them up according to the date of issue, so it goes like first release, box set, stand-alone re-release? Should you put the box set between by Brakhage and The White Sheik , and have #5 oddly standing out in the box?

Well, what you do is you keep all the originals together in numerical order, then follow those with the re-issues (in numerical order).

And. me, I vote for a whole new set of spine numbers, starting with #1.

[denti alligator]

Then again, there's the whole catch-22 issue: if BD comes with the book, then those who upgrade the title will wind up with two copies of the same book; if it doesn't, those who have been holding off will miss out on that particular supplement that only's available on the SD version - oh the dilemma.

If they're smart they will make sure Blu-ray versions will include ALL of the extras (including books). Then the decision is simple: sell the SD, buy the new BR. Why would I want both? I would use the money I make selling the SD to buy the BR.

With older titles I would want to upgrade anyway, and have followed this pattern with re-releases (sell old version, buy new one).

Anyone wanna trade Man Who Fell to Earth?

[colinr0380]

If they're smart they will make sure Blu-ray versions will include ALL of the extras (including books). Then the decision is simple: sell the SD, buy the new BR. Why would I want both? I would use the money I make selling the SD to buy the BR.

With older titles I would want to upgrade anyway, and have followed this pattern with re-releases (sell old version, buy new one).

This is where I think it may get complicated as I'd argue for a full BD set and maybe a stand-alone Blu-Ray of just the film at a little bit of a discount for those of us who have all the extras and just want the film again, similar to the way they released the anamorphic Brazil in both the 3 disc edition and in a single disc for original purchasers to just be able to replace their film disc rather than the whole package.

Anyone wanna trade Man Who Fell to Earth?

No way, I'm keeping my book! I read it at work when a power outage meant the electricity went off for the whole afternoon! It was fun to be getting paid for a wonderful read (Don't worry I'd actually gotten ahead of myself so I wasn't being any more unproductive than I would have been if the power had been on - I just wouldn't have been able to openly pull out a book and read!)

Fox copied it and that gimmick wore out its novelty fast, they don't even use put numbers on the spine of their Collector's Edition or Studio Classics anymore (ASAIK). (Re-phrased the above sentence, so that people would hopefully understand what my point is.)

Fox did it twice, with the contemporary films strand never even getting off the ground as they couldn't keep track of their numbering system (didn't they release some titles with the same spine numbers two or three times?(!)) Either way the copy of Cronenberg's Fly is number 20!

The difference I think is that Fox were hamstrung by being limited only to the titles they held, repeating some titles they had released in previous series before the numbered ones (You might want Die Hard but would probably have bought the 'Five Star Collection' boxset that had been around for four years previously and so have no need for it again in a numbered version!), and the combination of truly great films (Cronenberg's Fly in an essential edition) with truly bad films (The Fly II) which might have quickly put people out of the "gotta catch 'em all" frame of mind!

The 'Studio Classics' line fared no better - Love Is A Many Splendored Thing, Gentleman's Agreement and Anastasia are decent films but not exactly exciting and it is perhaps telling that the only title that aroused a lot of cinephile interest was Sunrise that was kept as a non-numbered special offer. (I don't want to denigrate the Studio Classics line too much - I'm extremely happy to have copies of Desk Set, The Inn Of The Sixth Happiness and The Diary Of Anne Frank but they did seem to follow an alternating pattern of fluffy 'women's pictures' and westerns for the guys). Then of course the many Ford films they released were negated by the Ford at Fox sets.

This is not to completely attack your argument (you shouldn't buy just for the number, but I don't agree that people do buy just for the number, isn't it more likely that people have large Criterion collections because more of the films are worth buying?) but more to say that there are lots of factors at play in whether a numbering system is a success or failure: it is a way of simplifying your catalogue and making it easier to understand (as long as you don't confuse the numbering system either for your staff or your customers!); it provides another way of accessing the collection (it might be simplistic but it is not a bad idea to start at 1 and work your way through if you aren't sure where to start your film journey! And remember that is only one of many ways that Criterion's website allows you to order the films); and it allows you to see which films are newer releases and which are generally older ones at a glance (reissues excepted of course!)

And. me, I vote for a whole new set of spine numbers, starting with #1.

I think that what Criterion does with the Blu-Ray spine numbers will actually be extremely telling - if they just add a "B" suffix or something like that to the existing DVD spine number (e.g. 10B for Walkabout or 171B for Contempt) they are probably thinking of standard DVD sticking around for a while as at least being a format still in as much need of consideration as hi-def.

If they, as is probably more likely and less unwieldy, start their Blu-Ray releases from 1 I would expect a full move over to hi-def sooner rather than later.

If they (even more likely) don't put a spine number on them at all (as MoC seems not to be doing), then either they're hedging their bets and playing their cards close to their chest (not fully committing to a full rerelease of their titles on the new format either so they can keep their options open or maybe also because they'd need to renegotiate a ton of contracts for Blu-Ray to be in any way able to make that kind of commitment) or they've taken editman's comments to heart!

[Spunky714]

In terms of numbering, I think it would be best to integrate it with the current spines.

For example, Wages of Fear is 36BR, The Third Man 64BR, etc.

This is assuming, however, that there are concurrent SD and BR releases. It seems like there wouldn't be one without the other (i.e. Blu-only releases), but I guess that would mean there wouldn't be a SD spine number. For example, future numbering would go 500, 500BR, 501BR, 502, 502BR (if #501 only had a BR release).

S714

[Darth Lavender]

This is where I think it may get complicated as I'd argue for a full BD set and maybe a stand-alone Blu-Ray of just the film at a little bit of a discount for those of us who have all the extras and just want the film again, similar to the way they released the anamorphic Brazil in both the 3 disc edition and in a single disc for original purchasers to just be able to replace their film disc rather than the whole package.

I think the big difference there (Brazil vs Man Who Fell...) is in the actual prices. A bare-bones "Man Who Fell to Earth" would only be $10 cheaper than the feature packed version. Whereas the feature-packed Brazil was something like $50 or $60? Similarly, I think that is one of the reasons why The Last Emperor is getting released as a single disk.

As for the book, I had pretty much assumed it would be included with the Bluray. Releasing a bluray which is still (in some ways) inferior to the SD would be... a little odd.

As for people ending up with two books, just give one to a friend.

[keeproductions]

Frankly, I'm surprised at all the talk about spine numbers and whether they will change them or delete them all together.

I just don't see any of this happening. Spine Numbers are part of Criterion's bread and butter and always have been. It is organic to their whole process since the beginning. Without it, there isn't as great a cohesion for the COLLECTION part of their name, and there isn't the impetus for fanboys with a little extra spending cash to acquire the whole kit and caboodle.

Yes, the whole brand is built on prestige of a certain order, but they are a small outfit and no way would they jeopardize any part of the cash cow. It may not be a topic that isn't often talked about in their hallowed halls, but they must admit to themselves (at least in the accounting department) that they are the Faberge and Hummel of the DVD business.

FWIW I just don't see any significant change to the numbering. Just like the two different versions of Zissou had the same spine number, I see the two different versions of the BR candidates doing the same. I believe the delineation will come in the subtle differences in the packaging not the number.

Same style of packaging (clear Amaray or Digipak) but with a "Wacky B" (which I love) on the front and spine. Big sticker on the shrink wrap touting its "Blu-Ray'edness," wording similar to Eclipse (Blu-Ray from the Criterion Collection) and perhaps a light blue tint to the entire spine (which I would hate). And that all important, little number will not change at all. Important for those who look for it and all but invisible for those blissfully unaware.

I just don't see this a being a reboot to the line. Although the notice was poorly worded at times (creating 10 pages of speculation here), I foresee HD and SD versions coexisting for each of the titles mentioned and those to come. Each designed and developed to be easily inserted into the current numbering , fanboy shelving, and packaging scheme, no matter which version you decided to buy now, or even better for them, upgrade to in the future.

[Darth Lavender]

That's about what I was thinking (and certainly hoping) BIG bluray sign on the outer shrink-wrap, and SD style cases (almost indistinguishable from the SD version)

As to spine-numbers, I definitely fit into the "almost unnoticable if you don't look for it" category.
I truly cannot imagine wanting to have ALL the Criterion DVDs. (Mysteries of the Organism, for example, sounds like the kind of movie I wouldn't even want to watch, much less have on my shelf. Then there's all the out of print titles and, perhaps more importantly, all the titles that have since been released in better versions (Kwaidan, Onibaba, Flesh for Frankenstein, etc.) and then, most important THERE'S OVER 400 OF THEM )
Actually, an example of how little spine numbers mean to me, I think I owned Devil & Daniel Webster and Richard III for something like a year or more before I happened to notice they were consecutive numbers.
I do think, though, giving the film a 'number' does perhaps give it a nice sense of being part of a larger collection. But, it's much closer to the way limited-edition collectibles might have a number. It just emphasises that there's a finite number of movies in the Criterion Collection, and each 'numbered' film must therefor have a significance.
I would offer one small critique of sets like Fanny & Alexander and Eisenstein, were the outer box gets it's own number. I'd rather they stuck to giving the numbers to actual movies (even feature-length special-features like the "Ingmar Bergman Makes a Movie")

While we're one the subject of spine numbers, one idea (although it's far too late for Criterion to actually do this) perhaps from a collector's point of view they might have done better to arrange the numbers into individual collections. Say give all the Ingmar Bergman films numbers from 1 to whatever. And give the Japanese Horror films their own numbers from 1 to 5 or whatever.

[fdm]

That's about what I was thinking (and certainly hoping) BIG bluray sign on the outer shrink-wrap, and SD style cases (almost indistinguishable from the SD version)

I think by "BIG" you've already hit on why this is not a good idea. Same reason all those folks bought the HD-DVD version of Blue Planet: because their regular upconverting DVD players were hooked up to their HD TVs. Then it turns out they just wouldn't play for some reason. If they're the same size, gobs of people will buy the wrong ones. [Edit: Actually, gobs of people will probably look at the price and go: I never even heard of this one, and put it back on the shelf, but oh well...] Kinda like when prior to that they had to figure out that they really wanted the full screen version rather than the widescreen version because of them picture parts that was all blacked out.

Similarly, the box sizes should conform a bit more to the blu-ray sizes, i.e., the smaller the better, rather than all be big ole bulky things that you'll have to try to squeeze somewhere on one of our ever decreasing empty shelves. Otherwise those BR fan boys (like me, though in this case it doesn't matter quite so much to me -- I'm more of a cardboard hater than a size matters kind of guy) will look at them like many of them do the Warner's BR coffee table books as something they'll wait for to come out in regular thin BR plastic cases (I do fall into this category, I won't be buying too many of those coffee book things).

I really like the size of the BR cases. If they had been even smaller and thinner I would probably have liked them even more... (I've run out of shelf space and am just about out of closet space...)

[Tommaso]

As to spine-numbers, I definitely fit into the "almost unnoticable if you don't look for it" category.

Good to hear that. I order my discs according to directors anyway, otherwise I simply wouldn't be able to find them. And it just seems absurd to me to collect all the CC's just because they're on CC. The spine numbers are helpful to give you a rough idea about when the disc came out, though. If it's lower than 150, I habitually check whether there's not a superior version of a particular film out somewhere now, whereas you can buy most CC's with a higher number almost blindly.

I truly cannot imagine wanting to have ALL the Criterion DVDs. (Mysteries of the Organism, for example, sounds like the kind of movie I wouldn't even want to watch, much less have on my shelf.

If I may so: you're making a serious mistake there, very serious. The title may seem absurd, but really, this is not "Koko" territory. Not at all.

[denti alligator]

As for box size:

I really, really hope they do NOT go for the smaller, thinner standard Blu case, and instead keep the same size and shape as the SDs. I like Criterion's designs, and I don't really want them to mess with them just for this new format. Put a big blu sticker on 'em.

[Darth Lavender]

If I may so: you're making a serious mistake there, very serious. The title may seem absurd, but really, this is not "Koko" territory. Not at all.

Koko is a comparison that never would have occured to me (that actually seems like an ok movie; worth at least watching as a curiousity. Although, again, I doubt I want to actually buy it) "Mysteries of the Organism" (and, also, "Sweet Movie") just seem like films which both rely very heavily on the 'shock' element.
And, generally speaking, I'll only watch 'shocking' films if there's some overwhelming artistic merit and/or it plays particularly well to my other sensibilities. ("Salo" being an excellent example of both. A well made film that does a good job of prompting thoughts on the nature of horror, with an interesting structure to it, fine set-design, frequent but not 'graphic' violence (the camera is always kept at a comfortable distance,) etc. etc. Cronenberg's Crash would also come under that category) Again, I'm talking about personal preferences here; Mysteries and Sweet Movie do seem like the types of film that, by choice of the director, are designed to contradict/challenge what makes a 'good' film, making actual criticism particularly inapplicable.
My point being, I'm not saying Mysteries of the Organism is a 'bad' movie (and I'm certainly not saying it's a good movie) but it's one that I personally suspect I would find it either boring, pretentious or nauseating. The thing is, I'm just not a fan of avant-garde montage type stuff in general. Some of it is "ok" or "mildly interesting" to me.

[fiddlesticks]

I expected this announcement would generate a lot of discussion, but I never imagined that that discussion would be centered on two topics: spine numbers and whether or not the SD versions are suddenly overpriced. As far as package design is concerned, I expect that they'll come up with something that makes the BR's easily distinguishable from the SD's, not just on the store shelf (where they're likely to be in different shelves anyway) but also on the collector's shelf at home, for those who have both editions and choose to shelve them by director or title or (gasp) spine number. That means something on the spine must jump out at you--a (BR) logo, or a tint, or something.