criterionforum.org

reno dakota wrote:

movielocke wrote:

matrixschmatrix wrote: If I recall correctly they did that with the Seventh Seal, and they're planning on doing it with Black Narcissus and (apparently) the Thin Red Line.

also, 400 Blows and For All Mankind

I think HistroyProf's point is that 2-disc DVD releases at $29.95 are unusual. The DVD releases for Black Narcissus, 400 Blows and For All Mankind are all 1-disc.

Correct...if this holds, this and Thin Red Line will be the first ever 2 disc releases at the lower price point and distinct from the blu pricing. It's a good sign and makes sense considering the reality of dvd production costs having decreased dramatically in the last few years. Granted, I'll be forking over the big bucks for the blu rays, so it's not like i'll be saving money, but it should increase sales a bit and bring more folks into the fold.

Well, if we're going to get technical, Beastie Boys was the first 2-disc release at $30, follwed by Tanner '88.

HistoryProf wrote:...if this holds, this and Thin Red Line will be the first ever 2 disc releases at the lower price point and distinct from the blu pricing.

Well, not exactly.

cdnchris wrote:Well, if we're going to get technical, Beastie Boys was the first 2-disc release at $30, follwed by Tanner '88.

if you want to get technical, you can see I said "the first ever 2 disc releases at the lower price point and distinct from the blu pricing" - which has never happened before. if this holds, it's clear something is changing since there are two releases that are nothing like the one offs of the Beasties or Tanner '88. but of course someone here always has to nitpick when it's obvious what the overall point is.

HistoryProf wrote:if you want to get technical, you can see I said "the first ever 2 disc releases at the lower price point and distinct from the blu pricing" - which has never happened before.

Take another look at my post above. The "2-disc DVD at $29.95 / 1-disc Blu-ray at $39.95"-pricing structure has already happened with The Seventh Seal, and will happen again with Black Orpheus before either Mr. Lawrence or Thin Red Line is released.

reno dakota wrote:

HistoryProf wrote:if you want to get technical, you can see I said "the first ever 2 disc releases at the lower price point and distinct from the blu pricing" - which has never happened before.

Take another look at my post above. The "2-disc DVD at $29.95 / 1-disc Blu-ray at $39.95"-pricing structure has already happened with The Seventh Seal, and will happen again with Black Orpheus before either Mr. Lawrence or Thin Red Line is released.

I mean, regardless, it looks like this is a direction they're going now.

It's sort of a shame- the stated reason they kept the prices at the same level was to take price as a factor out of the choice between dvd and blu. I don't know that it ever really worked out that way- if you're willing to buy used, dvd is almost always significantly cheaper- but with the different price points, there's a financial incentive towards dvd even at something like the B&N 50% off sale.

My current set up lets me play blu-rays, but it doesn't make much difference visually. I can justify buying them when they're roughly the same price, but when one is significantly more than the other, it leads to an agonized decision between money now and the possibility of a better viewing experience later.

That said, I'm not going to bitch that things are getting cheaper.

reno dakota wrote: The "2-disc DVD at $29.95 / 1-disc Blu-ray at $39.95"-pricing structure has already happened with The Seventh Seal, and will happen again with Black Orpheus before either Mr. Lawrence or Thin Red Line is released.

Also, For All Mankind.

Tom Hagen wrote:Also, For All Mankind.

But that's a 1-disc DVD release, right?

If B&N does, indeed, conduct another 50% off Criterion sale next month, I am thinking of finally picking up Berlin Alexanderplatz. BUT, I live in constant fear that Criterion will randomly announce a new Blu edition. Is this a safe buy?

CrazedCollector wrote:I live in constant fear that Criterion will randomly announce a new Blu edition.

Constant fear you say.

I would be willing to wager about anything that BA would be among the very last titles that Criterion will be upgrading to Blu. It seems far too cost-prohibitave and unnecessary.

Tom Hagen wrote:I would be willing to wager about anything that BA would be among the very last titles that Criterion will be upgrading to Blu. It seems far too cost-prohibitave and unnecessary.

Yeah, if they didn't do The Human Condition while going through the original process, I can't imagine them revisiting BA....at least not in the next 5-10 years.

Does 16mm filmstock benefit significantly from HD?

matrixschmatrix wrote:Does 16mm filmstock benefit significantly from HD?

Yes, if done properly. It might not be the best example, but The Wrestler looks fantastic on Blu-ray.

What about when the 16mm film in question has a "soft glow" look, as a result of (horrible IMHO) lens filters, including a nylon stocking over the lens?

This makes me feel like some people still don't understand what exactly Blu-Ray is.

I don't know what you mean by that. If a 16 mm film was intentionally hazy and blurry to begin with, then there may not be any significant improvement with a higher-resolution transfer. Maybe there would be, but I'd have to compare the results.

Blu-ray can essentially replicate the resolution of 16mm. Whereas if you're watching a DVD of a 16mm film, it's been compressed to about one-sixth of the original size. Granted, it will still look hazy and blurry on Blu-ray (as intended) and might not make the best demo material, but it won't have compression artifacts on top of this, like you will with DVD. As I understand it, the only things that can't benefit from a Blu-ray upgrade are materials that were shot in SD video in the first place, like a lot of TV shows, or like the two later films in Criterion's Costa set.

I understand the capabilities of the media, but the question was about significant improvement, which is what I was talking about specifically with regard to Berlin Alexanderplatz. I did not see any major compression artifacts on the Criterion DVDs, so given the way it was filmed I'd guess there wouldn't be a big difference in sharpness, least of all in the many parts of the film that were hazy and soft on the original negative.

I'm no expert on HD telecine, but I think it's a mistake to assume that literally every film shot on film and not SD video would benefit from a Blu-ray release, significantly or otherwise, in ways that are immediately visible to the eye. Exceptions could include 8mm, or films whose visuals have been purposely altered from a normal, focused picture, or those whose surviving elements show an extreme lack of detail. Aside from how things work out on paper regarding compression, there are all kinds of other real-world factors in play.

Jeff wrote:

HistoryProf wrote:Very very interesting that TRL and Mr. Lawrence are both listed at $29.95 for 2 disc DVDs and $39.95 for blu...would be a fantastic development if it holds.

I'm thinking that this might actually be a new pricing structure, and part of a very gradual eventual phasing out of standard DVDs for most new titles (like MoC).

If Criterion wants to encourage its customers to upgrade to Blu-ray, they should make the DVD editions more expensive, not cheaper.

Yeah, like the music industry, and we can see how well that worked out.

MyNameCriterionForum wrote:Yeah, like the music industry, and we can see how well that worked out.

No, DVD-Audio and SACD failed because they were more expensive than the same CD.

Your analogy is correct, but my point was that an arbitrary (and clearly dishonest vis-a-vis production costs) pricing system does no one any good.

MyNameCriterionForum wrote:Your analogy is correct, but my point was that an arbitrary (and clearly dishonest vis-a-vis production costs) pricing system does no one any good.

Criterion has always been about offering the best quality product possible, which now means Blu-ray and not DVD. Back in the LaserDisc days they didn't also release everything on VHS, because that was an inferior format. DVD has now become an inferior format because there is a much better alternative available.

If charging (suggested retail price) $30 for the Blu-ray, and $35 for the same title on DVD encourages more people to buy the Blu-ray, then that is good for Criterion and consumers. It is to Criterion's credit that they introduced Blu-rays at the same price as their DVDs, instead of profiting like the big studios.

But the sooner Criterion only needs to deal with one format the better, because it means it can concentrate more resources on releasing more films instead of dealing with two different formats.

I hope Criterion eventually shifts its Eclipse line to 720p Blu-ray, so it can release 2 or 3 films per disc, at far better than DVD resolution, and using modern compression formats.

Honestly, if they wanted people to switch over quickly, they could just cut the upgrade-to-blu price from $20 to say $5 or $10- at $5, I'd trade every upgradable one I had without hesitation, and at $10 I'd still do at least a few. And I'd never worry about getting nailed by a surprise re-release again.