Archived Criterion Streaming Discussion

[willoneill]

Just out of curiosity, where do people feel using a service to mask one's IP address in order to use Hulu Plus is on the totem pole in terms of illegality relative to say pirating?

From what I've been told (by people who would be in a position to know), in Canada at least, masking one's IP address isn't illegal. However, providing such a service is.

[Minkin]

Forgot to mention that the other day they added these:

Kon Ichikawa's Being Two Isn't Easy (1962)

also some of the titles that jwd5275 mentioned - Les Blank (Always for Pleasure) Obayashi (Sada)

[rrenault]

How long has Erice's El Sur been up?

[Jeff]

How long has Erice's El Sur been up?

Since February 28, 2012

[rrenault]

Oh, I thought it was a new addition, since it's at the top of their list of "recently added" films.

[jwd5275]

It is an understandable confusion, since during this 101 Days of Summer promotion, if the film that they have chosen to be featured for a particular day is already up on Hulu, they will take it down for a week before hand. The result is that it shows as recently added. You can always double check this list or this list if you have any doubts.

[Minkin]

Since they've been such a big hit, they've added another Kinoshita:

You Were Like a Wild Chrysanthemum (1955)

[Michael Kerpan]

Since they've been such a big hit, they've added another Kinoshita:

You Were Like a Wild Chrysanthemum (1955)

I really disliked this one when I watched it. It has one of the more annoying and kitschy flashback presentation tricks ever.

[Minkin]

The Neighbor's Wife and Mine (1931) - Heinosuke Gosho
The Holy Man (1965, Mahapurush) - Satyajit Ray
The Maestro: King of the Cowboy Artists (1995) - Les Blank

Harold LLoyd shorts:

An Eastern Westerner (1920)
High and Dizzy (1920)
Number, Please? (1920)
Never Weaken (1921)

Also Criterion Cast posted that Fassbinder's Fox and His Friends (1975) has been added.

[domino harvey]

High and Dizzy's great, I was surprised when it didn't get paired with Safety Last

[swo17]

Ditto Never Weaken. Maybe Criterion just didn't want to give the impression that all Lloyd did were gags at great heights.

[tavernier]

In today's email to NY Times subscribers, there's a link to a 2-month free Hulu Plus trial.

[Dragoon En Regalia]

An Innocent Witch (1965, Gosho): "Heinosuke Gosho's darkest and most acclaimed film of the '60s."

I gotta say, this coverage is escalating quickly.

[chatterjees]

I wonder what Criterion wants to do with Ray's The Holy Man (1965, Mahapurush), especially when they have already separated its soul mate The Coward (1965) and shoved it as a short film (?) in The Big City disc! I guess Ray has made only two comedies and The Holy Man is definitely no minnow!

[jwd5275]

Another Ozu silent Woman of Tokyo is up.

[Taketori Washizu]

Keep the Fassbinder coming. Jailbait and I'm a happy camper.

[headacheboy]

I'm not sure what is happening over at HuluPlus but when I attempted to watch Woman of Tokyo and then again with Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe they both had commercials. I contacted HuluSupport but they claimed that since the Ozu film wasn't an "official" Criterion film they had no choice but to show commercials. I tried to explain that I've seen numerous films that aren't an "official" Criterion release and none of them had commercials but that point was duly ignored. When Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe was posted, I tried watching it to see if it had commercials and indeed, it did. When I wrote wrote Hulu to let them know this film was an official release on a Criterion DVD, why then did it contain commercials, again I was ignored.

I've been a paying subscriber for two years so I'm not certain what changed. This happened earlier this summer when I viewed Bergman's Faro Document 1979 and it contained commercials. I watched the entire film, commercials and all, and when I wrote Hulu about that, they said they were in the wrong as no Criterion film should have commercials if you are a paying subscriber. That incident took place on 7 July.

I have e-mailed Criterion but I've heard nothing back from them. I deplore commercials and I've no intent of watching anymore movies on HuluPlus which run commercials. I feel like a schmuck getting worked up over this, after all there are considerably more important issues than this. Just the same, I pay them $7.99 a month for the privilege of watching movies without commercials so I expect things to run smoothly, especially when they've run for two years without commercials.

[Minkin]

I'm not sure what is happening over at HuluPlus

Whenever Criterion puts something for us proletariat non-paying members, they always add commercials, which causes everyone to get commercials. Usually once it goes back to "Plus members only" the commercials disappear. I'm assuming you watched these right after they were added to the 'Criterion 101 days of summer' ? If they still have commercials after their 2 day free period, then yeah, there's a problem, otherwise I think you will be alright.
----
In other news, Criterion just added:

Fall Guy (1982) - Kinji Fukasaku

[headacheboy]

I'm not sure what is happening over at HuluPlus

Whenever Criterion puts something for us proletariat non-paying members, they always add commercials, which causes everyone to get commercials. Usually once it goes back to "Plus members only" the commercials disappear. I'm assuming you watched these right after they were added to the 'Criterion 101 days of summer' ? If they still have commercials after their 2 day free period, then yeah, there's a problem, otherwise I think you will be alright.
----
In other news, Criterion just added:

Fall Guy (1982) - Kinji Fukasaku

Ah, I gotcha. I did indeed try watching them immediately upon them being put up. However, I checked Fall Guy this morning and it is without commercials. Just the same, I see what you are saying and I'll tone down my reaction a bit. I'm never the most patient boy in the room.

[albucat]

That being said, don't tone it down to Hulu so much. They're never going to know there is a problem if no one tells them--Criterion doesn't actually watch the movies once they're up, they seem to just assume the streams will be fine as plan. That's often not the case.

[headacheboy]

I received a response from Hulu about my questions concerning why there are commercials in recent films such as Ozu's Woman of Tokyo and the Les Blank short Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe. Here it is in full (in bold print):

Thanks for reaching out to us about this. I totally understand that this is kind of an interesting situation with shows labeled under the Criterion Collection. While most of them are ad-free from the Criterion Collection, there's several movies on our site that's simply distributed but not owned by them at all. I know that sounds a bit complicated but Hulu itself actually does not make the decisions on how the Criterion Collection decides to distribute these shows.

I assure you that we would love to provide as much content to you with little or no advertising. I also understand that the way the Criterion Collection chooses to distribute these shows seems arbitrary at times. So for now, I'll pass on your feedback to the content team and we'll work on improving this feature.

If you have any other questions, concerns or feedback please don't hesitate to let me know!

So it seems that Hulu is laying the blame at Criterion. This is essentially what they told me when I questioned them on Twitter. I've not heard from Criterion as of yet (it has been about four days since I wrote). I understand the difference between ownership and distribution (although I'm not as savvy about it as many of you) but honestly, this makes little sense to me. If we pay $7.99 for no commercials then there should be no commercials. I'm not sure if other films have commercials in them since I've not seen everything on Hulu, but I still don't buy their response.

[jwd5275]

That makes absolutely no sense. For example, I watch a longer Harold Lloyd like Speedy and there are no commercials, yet I watch An Eastern Westerner and Never Weaken and they have commericials. They come from the same license and distributor. Similarly I have been watching all the Les Blank films and all except Werner Hezog Eats His Shoe are commercial-free. My suspicion is that it has to do with the length of the films. For some reason The shorter films are being labelled as television episodes instead of films in Hulu's system, so the commercials are being inserted where breaks would be. Hulu hasn't figured this out, so they are laying the blame on Criterion...

[albucat]

What are you two streaming Hulu through? I wonder if that's part of the mess. I've watched a fair amount, but only through my ps3, and have never hit any commercials.

In any case, Hulu's answer sounds like complete bullshit, and I'm glad you notified Criterion about what's happening (even if their response is, as ever, painfully slow)--my understanding of the deal they struck with Hulu was that they were committed to no commercials in their films except when they're free. I don't think they'd be happy to hear that it's happening, or Hulu's excuse. I think the ones that Hulu claims are "distributed by them but not owned" are the ones that aren't featured on their channel but have received physical releases by Criterion.

[Applesauce]

For some reason The shorter films are being labelled as television episodes instead of films in Hulu's system

This has also happened with features, notably a couple of Kinoshita and Ray titles that I had trouble finding. No ads, though.

[headacheboy]

I predominantly watch Hulu through my laptop because if I watch through my Roku it invariably has problems, which is weird because I have no other problems with anything I run through my Roku. That's one of the reasons I'm a bit curmudgeonly about Hulu, they are incredibly inconsistent with their service. But I run it through my laptop and then it works perfectly.

My suspicion is that it has to do with the length of the films. For some reason The shorter films are being labelled as television episodes instead of films in Hulu's system, so the commercials are being inserted where breaks would be.

I think you make a great point there. Anytime I've seen commercials it has generally been with the shorter films.

I think the ones that Hulu claims are "distributed by them but not owned" are the ones that aren't featured on their channel but have received physical releases by Criterion.

They even said as much when I spoke to them through Twitter. They told me I could always reference Criterion's page and see what they have released if I don't understand what does and doesn't get commercials. It was about then that I thanked them and moved on. I didn't want to get into a yelling match on Twitter (I've done that before and felt quite foolish at the end of such an argument).