criterionforum.org

Andre Jurieu wrote:

ByMarkClark.com wrote:As for diluting the brand -- sorry, I just don't see it. As others have posted already, it's not like the CC hasn't issued plenty of discs over the years that were literally or virtually bare-bones.

But maybe creating this new line will effectively mean that this practice of issuing films on DVD with little to no extras will not occur as often. In fact, I bet creating this new line will almost force Criterion to add extras to every title they choose to release in order to justify the added price (and the Wacky C).

This is what I'm thinking. Sure, there were exceptions to the dominant brand identity (see my earlier post), both in film selection and extras, but the Criterion brand identity was not predicated on the exceptions. "Criterion-quality" was not a by-word for "non-anamorphic bare-bones presentation of an okay transfer at top-of-the-line price point" (a description that would apply to High and Low) - or at least that certainly wasn't their intention!

If the Eclipse move is all about enhancing the brand, then what Andre predicts will surely be the case, and the identity of the Eclipse sub-brand is thus likely to be something like "Criterion quality (in terms of film selection and transfers, though maybe not source quality) but bare-bones and cheap cheap cheap!" So, I expect that Matt is also right in predicting some kind of fundamental alignment with the Criterion brand. They'd be foolish not to exploit this existing asset. Wacky C -> Wacky E seems like a logical choice.

Anyway, I'm sick of talking marketing strategy: roll out those first titles!

zedz wrote:Anyway, I'm sick of talking marketing strategy: roll out those first titles!

Exactly. Quit this nancy breathless trepidation and rejoice you're getting some Bernard & Gremillion. Who cares if Fumiko orders Lee Kline to hover over a telecine operator so he can put out MALDONE or GEULLE DAMOUR under a label called Lumpy Ochre Vomit Entertainment? You're buying the fucking films owing to 1) the folks who made them and 2) the folks who zapped them on disc. Great films by great discmakers = worthwhile buy. All else is carbon dioxide.

Just like the quality of cover art on exalted releases I could really care less.

Did you intentionally spell out LOVE with the capital letters of your fake company?

PS. Yay Eclipse!

Who doesn't love ochre vomit?

Actually no. A good omen though, must incorporate my stable of tap dancing dwarves who fire nail guns at each other's eyeballs under that name.

My bad re: EARRINGS. I must have been thinking of LE JOUR SE LEVE. I knew the 50-film box had FIRES ON THE PLAIN and SOME mouth-watering French classic.

A newly restored Madame De... is part of the touring Janus Films 50th anniversary celebration so it is definitely coming in 2007 either way.

Here is the new logo:



and I'm sure you all new this already but it will be a line of B-movies by important directors, which launches this fall!

and here you can check out the new animation:

http://www.gograf.com/EclipseAnimation

Enjoy!

hammock wrote:and I'm sure you all new this already but it will be a line of B-movies by important directors, which launches this fall!

Are you quoting someone here? Because I'm pretty sure we've learned that that's exactly what it's not. And "fall" ends in about a month.

Matt wrote:

hammock wrote:and I'm sure you all new this already but it will be a line of B-movies by important directors, which launches this fall!

Are you quoting someone here? Because I'm pretty sure we've learned that that's exactly what it's not. And "fall" ends in about a month.

It's a quote from the design team.

hammock wrote:It's a quote from the design team

Thanks. Lovely animation, by the way. It looks as if they've decided to drop the in-logo text, though. Probably wise as it would be illegible in the size it's printed on the cover art.

I guess it's about time to start thinking about an Eclipse sub-forum. Sigh.

Matt, do you wanna trade avatars for awhile?

Not that the logo is the crucial matter here, but I'm rather disappointed that the logo doesn't involve any solar eclipse imagery. It seemed like the new Criterion logo was perfect for that....

the eclipse logo looks like the Internet Explorer logo.

Shite!

backstreetsbackalright wrote:Not that the logo is the crucial matter here, but I'm rather disappointed that the logo doesn't involve any solar eclipse imagery. It seemed like the new Criterion logo was perfect for that....

Yea, I agree. I always had it in my head that that was practically the whole point of the Wacky C.... It was a new direction for Criterion and it fit well to incorporate an eclipse motif at some point.

I also agree it does look a bit "Microsofty." They could have just as well called the line Explorer instead of Eclipse with this logo.

I guess I don't hate it. Just underwhelmed and surprised at the apparent missed opportunity.

rumz wrote:the eclipse logo looks like the Internet Explorer logo.

Shite!

And to think they probably paid thousands of dollars for that...

BTW, who's betting that the new Eclipse Collection cover art design will be similar to the current CC one? Just change the wacky C with the wacky E and Eclipse instead of Criterion and you have a line that will not only visually appeal to the die-hard Criterion collector but also to the ocasional stingy one (namely me!).

Matt wrote:

hammock wrote:and I'm sure you all new this already but it will be a line of B-movies by important directors, which launches this fall!

Are you quoting someone here? Because I'm pretty sure we've learned that that's exactly what it's not. And "fall" ends in about a month.

I think that what the design team means by "B-movies" is "second-tier" movies by important directors, as opposed to "B-movies" meaning cheesy monster pictures. The Kurosawa and Bergman titles that have been mentioned would certainly fit their description.

"The Eclipse Collection, a continuing series of mildly important almost-classic and contemporary films..."

Jeff wrote:"The Eclipse Collection, a continuing series of mildly important almost-classic and contemporary films..."

Best post of the month so far!

Matt wrote:

hammock wrote:It's a quote from the design team.

Thanks. Lovely animation, by the way. It looks as if they've decided to drop the in-logo text, though. Probably wise as it would be illegible in the size it's printed on the cover art.

I guess it's about time to start thinking about an Eclipse sub-forum. Sigh.

That quote was written in june 2006 and is second hand information anyway, and probably wrong/out-of-date now. Given its already almost mid-November and fall is almost over, and we have had no word of official releases etc.
Therefore, it seems likely the release timeline has been pushed back until spring 2007 i would guess.
I like the new logo. It is obviously meant to complement the main criterion new look and it does that well.

I think Eclipse is a really good idea and i'm looking forward to its launch, and buying many excellent films at cheaper prices.

Matt wrote: I guess it's about time to start thinking about an Eclipse sub-forum. Sigh.

I vote for just adding it as a third part of the Criterion Section (i.e. The Criterion Collection, The Eclipse Collection, consolidated Rumors and News for both) rather than giving it its own Section a la MoC, Second Run.

zedz wrote:I vote for just adding it as a third part of the Criterion Section (i.e. The Criterion Collection, The Eclipse Collection, consolidated Rumors and News for both) rather than giving it its own Section a la MoC, Second Run.

A good suggestion, I think. We'd probably want to have individual threads dedicated to Eclipse "speculation" and "cover art," though. Otherwise, quite a few threads in the Rumors and News section would become too unwieldy and difficult to browse through.

tryavna wrote:A good suggestion, I think. We'd probably want to have individual threads dedicated to Eclipse "speculation" and "cover art," though. Otherwise, quite a few threads in the Rumors and News section would become too unwieldy and difficult to browse through.

Cover Art, sure (what's one more thread to ignore?), but I don't expect there would be much meaningful distinction between random speculation for one label or the other, since the eventual assignment of a title might end up coming down to availability of extras or quality of source, and we don't need people posting the same random speculations in two different threads.

With only twelve titles per year (think of it as one extra Criterion each month), I don't think any threads would get overwhelmed with Eclipse stuff.

Did I miss something? How do we know they are planning only 12 releases per year? -read as inquisitive, not confrontational.

Derek Estes wrote:Did I miss something? How do we know they are planning only 12 releases per year? -read as inquisitive, not confrontational.

Mentioned here. From an interview with Fumiko Takagi in Cahiers du cinéma.

Limiting themselves to 12 releases a year in advance is not very wise. If it becomes a huge succes I'm sure they will give it more attention and up the numbers. Then again, they might as well just do so to give it a "special feeling" and say "whatever" when people start asking them why they changed from the original releaseplan.