Production Costs?

[Martha]

According to Peter Becker, who was a large of part of an NPR story on DVD production (which you can listen to here, and which there was a thread about at one time), it can cost "$25,000 or more to prepare a film for digital release." And that's if no restoration is needed.

The story is well worth the 7 minutes it will take you listen to it.

[analoguezombie]

On the commentary for Romero's "Martin" producer Al Rubenstein remarks that it cost almost half of the original production budget to restore the film for dvd. Martin's original budget was $75k. I assume he meant the whole dvd budget, but that can give you an idea.

That's a very good listen. I love it when the capitalist free market system can have indirect benefits such as film preservation. GO CAPITALISM!

[Tribe]

And here is a thread that may be of help.

John

[THX1378]

Thanks for posting that Martha. Anyone know if extra's are still a lot to produce or not? I remember someone saying that Arnold Schwarzenegger got $10,000 to $20,000 to record a commentary track for Total Recall which they said was way to much to pay for a commentary track.

[Gordon]

How much do you imagine it costs Criterion to acquire rights to a film; obtain elements; telecine; digitally restore/colour-correct; create menus; design artwork; manufacture artwork/packaging; do authoring tests and finally pull it all together and distribute? The reason I ask is that The Browning Version must have cost a fair bit to put together and they had tonnes of requests for this somewhat obscure film. In the last newsletter they made a point of this and it made we wonder how much the average Criterion costs and how often and how quickly they break even.

Any facts or comments will generally go unpreciated.

Cheers.

[pzman84]

I remember reading in the NY Times it costs about $4 to produce, distribute, and promote a DVD and they sell it to retailers for about $17. However, it was refering to new DVD releases. Since today's films are already Telecined and went through a DI for post-production, it probably is cheaper to transfer it to DVD than an older film, especially one that needs restoration. However, it was said on a thread here (can't remembar witch one) that all Criterion has to do is sell 10,000 units and they have made a profit. So, I don't think cost is ever really a factor in bringing a classic to DVD.

[fliggil]

I remember reading in the NY Times it costs about $4 to produce, distribute, and promote a DVD and they sell it to retailers for about $17. However, it was refering to new DVD releases. Since today's films are already Telecined and went through a DI for post-production, it probably is cheaper to transfer it to DVD than an older film, especially one that needs restoration. However, it was said on a thread here (can't remembar witch one) that all Criterion has to do is sell 10,000 units and they have made a profit. So, I don't think cost is ever really a factor in bringing a classic to DVD.

Do they usually sell 10,000 units of most releases though?

[Arn777]

According to a recent article published by French magazine Telerama, based on an interview withPeter Becker, the average is 20,000 and Criterion has sold over 10 million DVDs.

[Tribe]

According to a recent article published by French magazine Telerama, based on an interview withPeter Becker, the average is 20,000 and Criterion has sold over 10 million DVDs.

Is there a link to that, Arn? Or any chance you could scan it or something?

Tribe

[zedz]

I remember reading in the NY Times it costs about $4 to produce, distribute, and promote a DVD and they sell it to retailers for about $17. However, it was refering to new DVD releases. Since today's films are already Telecined and went through a DI for post-production, it probably is cheaper to transfer it to DVD than an older film, especially one that needs restoration. However, it was said on a thread here (can't remembar witch one) that all Criterion has to do is sell 10,000 units and they have made a profit. So, I don't think cost is ever really a factor in bringing a classic to DVD.

By the same token, I think the cost of bringing the average Criterion film to disc would be substantially higher than the industry standard. A lot more effort generally goes into the production of extras (compared with the godawful puff pieces that have already been produced by the publicity department for a new film and are simply recycled for most DVD releases), there's restoration work involved in most instances, and there are also licensing fees to contend with - not a cost for a Warner release of a Warner-owned film. I'd expect that in many cases the content production costs (as opposed to the physical production costs) for the DVD of a new film by a major studio would be negligible.

If the Criterion average is 20,000 per title, there are likely quite a few titles that scrape by under 10,000 (and presumably under break even) to balance their big titles like Fear and Loathing or Life Aquatic.

[Arn777]

I can't find a link, but it was in French anyway, I have the paper version. Nothing amazingly new apart from that bit of info, more about the history of Criterion and its importance on the DVD market, as seen by the French.

[arsonfilms]

I work in production for a midsize independant label, so I might be able to provide some extra info. We're working on our February titles at the moment, and our big release for the month should move an estimated 50,000 units. Between the minimum guarentee to the producers, authoring, replication, advertising, transfers, digital fixes etc., we're looking at roughly $250,000. This doesn't factor in things like salary for the art department, production team etc.

When we purchase a film, we typically buy either a Digital Beta or HD master. We've never mastered a film from 35mm, which is what Criterion typically does unless they purchase someone else's restoration. I can't speak to the costs of Datacine cleanups as I haven't used it through work or on my own films, but a basic Flame fix runs several grand an hour.

Extra and special features typically don't cost an arm and a leg when you're purchasing something that's already been put together, but for classic films these usually need to be cleaned up just like the feature, or shot specifically for the release. At that rate you're paying the interviewee whatever you're paying them on top of the usual salaries for the people who work on the film. My company's production team has four people. Check the credits on a Criterion disc sometime.

This is why Criterions cost as much as they do. The title I mentioned before is a two disc set that will retail for roughly half of what Criterion would charge, but we don't spend anywhere near the same amount of money to produce what we do.

[Narshty]

Yi Yi is $40 and the chief supplement, aside from a new video interview, is a commentary between Tony Rayns and Edward Yang that has been ported over from the UK release. The only thing I could imagine costing them a great deal is the 4K-resolution transfer for such a long film. Still, whatever the transfer may have cost, they'll have saved something in restoration, as it won't have required anything like the attention of, say, Boudu Saved from Drowning or The Children are Watching Us.

I just can't imagine a disc like this costs more to put together than the likes of Bad Timing or Masculin Feminin, which are jammed with video interviews, both newly produced and vintage, nice booklets and other goodies, yet only cost $29.95. With Bad Timing, Peter Becker admitted there was a tangle of music rights to sort out, which is no mean feat, in terms of both administration and licensing costs.

So are Criterion back to the old commentary = $40 strategy? Is this a straightforward policy simply to "straighten costs out" rather than accurately reflect the funds sunk into any individual release?

[marty]

So are Criterion back to the old commentary = $40 strategy? Is this a straightforward policy simply to "straighten costs out" rather than accurately reflect the funds sunk into any individual release?

Yes, I would think its to straighten the costs out. I would imagine some of their production costs would be enormous and they would have lost big-time on some titles. I also heard that Criterion are struggling financially and they also struggle to pay the sales agents their due overages for the films. Has anyone else heard this as well?

It wouldn't surprise me given the acquisition costs for the films for the North American territory. However, Criterion do sell a hell of a lot to overseas territories which actually breaches territorial rights as local distributors pay advances for these films only to find out the local video store stocks the Criterion version of the same title. Its funny that Amazon does not sell video games due to territorial rights to overseas territories but they sell DVDs? Mmmm.. I wonder why?

In the end, the poor little local distributor in overseas territories stands little chance against the behemoth of Criterion and Amazon!

[thomega]

However, Criterion do sell a hell of a lot to overseas territories which actually breaches territorial rights [...]
In the end, the poor little local distributor in overseas territories stands little chance against the behemoth of Criterion and Amazon!

Welcome to globalization ...

Today territorial distribution rights make sense only for theatrical distribution. The cost of interterritorial shipping has fallen to a fraction of the value of a DVD and the distributors should acknowledge this. I'm not going to buy a local P&S analogue transfer instead of a criterion release, because of territorial distribution rights!

[marty]

However, Criterion do sell a hell of a lot to overseas territories which actually breaches territorial rights [...]
In the end, the poor little local distributor in overseas territories stands little chance against the behemoth of Criterion and Amazon!

Welcome to globalization ...

Today territorial distribution rights make sense only for theatrical distribution. The cost of interterritorial shipping has fallen to a fraction of the value of a DVD and the distributors should acknowledge this. I'm not going to buy a local P&S analogue transfer instead of a criterion release, because of territorial distribution rights!

I agree. Neither would I. That is why I cannot understand why some local distributors (in Australia anyway) continue to release sub-standard versions of films already released by Criterion which are infinitely superior.

What I think Criterion should do (and if anyone from Criterion is listening!!!) is they should purchase North American rights as well as UK and Australia (at least the English-language territories) wherever possible. Compared to what they pay for North American rights, the prices for UK and Australia would be minimal. I know that in some some cases this is not always possible due to rights being owned by some other local distributor previously.

Then Criterion can form a long-term relationship with a reputable and respectable UK and Australian distributor, enter into a license agreement with them for which Criterion would get an agreed minimum guarantee and maybe some monies towards production costs. Then at least Criterion can recoup some of their high production costs. This will then ensure Criterion titles are distributed LEGALLY by another distributor in overseas territories who just handles the sales and distribution of their titles and thus retaining the Criterion brand. The local distributor will have identical slick artwork except maybe their logo on the back but would do the replication in their own territory from the DLT master supplied by Criterion with all the extras.

Then, at least, Criterion can be assured of greater market penetrarion and can be sold legally in all the major DVD outlets in UK and Australia. At the moment in Australia only a handful of stores carry Crierion titles albeit illegally. The local distributor would then pay any overages to Criterion once the minimum guarantee is recouped. This would help boost the coffers of Criterion immensely.

Anyway, just an idea.

[GringoTex]

So are Criterion back to the old commentary = $40 strategy? Is this a straightforward policy simply to "straighten costs out" rather than accurately reflect the funds sunk into any individual release?

Hasn't this always been Criterion's business model. If a title has commentary or is a double disc release, then it goes at the higher price point. And no mass product business prices to reflect the funds sunk in- it prices what the market will bear.

[Matt]

So are Criterion back to the old commentary = $40 strategy? Is this a straightforward policy simply to "straighten costs out" rather than accurately reflect the funds sunk into any individual release?

Hasn't this always been Criterion's business model. If a title has commentary or is a double disc release, then it goes at the higher price point.

Such a short memory you have! See the Disc with commentaries: $29.95 thread. You posted in it yourself only a year ago.

[Ted Todorov]

I also heard that Criterion are struggling financially and they also struggle to pay the sales agents their due overages for the films. Has anyone else heard this as well?

Huh? Your source?

This is very hard to fathom considering the DVD explosion in general, the amount of publicity Criterion has been getting in the NY Times and the rest of the mainstream press (not to mention on line), the fact that people all over the world buy their titles, etc. etc.

It would, though explain some of their recent more bizarre moves, like letting the rights of The Umbrellas of Cherbourg slip by and still not releasing Rohmer's Moral Tales (which require (expensive) restoration) in favor of re-releases of box set components and cheap titles (the rights to Koko were probably $1.98).

[Morbii]

However, it was said on a thread here (can't remembar witch one) that all Criterion has to do is sell 10,000 units and they have made a profit. So, I don't think cost is ever really a factor in bringing a classic to DVD.

You can find the article here:
http://www.dvdexclusive.com/article.asp ... ategoryID=

And the thread here:
http://www.criterionforum.org/forum/vie ... 76&start=0

[marty]

If you really want to ask a sensible question ask Warner Oz what in the fuck they are doing, if anything in R4. Since Ryan's Daughter they have not released a single classic title here, and nothing on the horizon. Incredible.

Good question. In the end, the Australian market is so small especially for back catalog titles that I don't blame some distributors like Warner Oz who don't bother to release some of their back catalog titles. For arthouse back catalog titles, the potential sales are embarassing. For example, some arthouse releases in this country sell less than 500 units. There is no way you can make money from such sales. For local Oz distributors to even break even on some of these back catalog arthouse titles they would have to sell at least 2,000-3,000 units. It's just not going to happen. I admire Aztec for releasing the Louis Malle films but I would think that sales for these films would be very limited.

The only way that local distributors can make money off these titles is to align themselves with a UK distributor who also have PAL releases and work together and replicate units and share the costs.

I only suggested CC to release films in Australia legally by working with local distributors as this would bring the price down for CC titles in Australia. At the moment, CC titles retail for around AUD$70-$100 which is highway robbery. Who knows how well CC titles could do with a concerted and targeted marketing campaign, reduced prices and stocking the titles in stores like JB Hi-Fi etc. and all the major retail outlets?

[Jimaku]

Since many (most?) Criterion films are not in English there is additionally the cost of commissioning translations for both the features and extras, which can run into thousands of dollars.

[marty]

Since many (most?) Criterion films are not in English there is additionally the cost of commissioning translations for both the features and extras, which can run into thousands of dollars.

While most recent films and even some older films that have been remastered by the producers normally have .stl subtitle files already but I would think that many of the obscure ones that Criterion have released would not so they would have to pay for the translation costs. It then makes sense that they should share these costs by working with other overseas distributors who can bear some of it relative to their respective market size.

[Cinesimilitude]

with online retailers and the specials there are on an almost monthly basis, criterions are really not expensive to acquire anymore. it is very normal for a major studio film to have a 29.99, or 34.99 MSRP, with a lesser film, and less content. Criterion is doing enough right to keep doing what they're doing, and that's what's important to me. Although, I would imagine that unless criterion goes with some money making discs out of the bag when they go HD we are going to see a price drop on the older titles.

[Jimaku]

Since many (most?) Criterion films are not in English there is additionally the cost of commissioning translations for both the features and extras, which can run into thousands of dollars.

While most recent films and even some older films that have been remastered by the producers normally have .stl subtitle files already but I would think that many of the obscure ones that Criterion have released would not so they would have to pay for the translation costs. It then makes sense that they should share these costs by working with other overseas distributors who can bear some of it relative to their respective market size.

Criterion pays for new or revised translations for practically all their films, including those that have already been translated. Most existing subtitle translations are riddled with both errors and infelicities of expression and really aren't up to Criterion's standards.