No.
I’m not sure what I’m having the harder time visualizing: the Criterion people watching Tv or people on TV talking about the films Criterion releases before Criterion gets the idea to release them …
You may not like all of the films on DVD/Blu-ray, but as their motto says, they’re “important classic and contemporary films”
annndddd…the point of this thread is??
What TV show talks about any of these films other than the Michael Bay ones?? You must love your television.
Patrick, don’t you remember on THE VIEW when they were discussing RAN …?
Today on Maury the topic was “A Woman Under the Influence…of CRACK!!!!!!!”
quentin,
did you post this thread because criterion has yet to choose your films to be released under the their banner?
…your last name is tarantino, right?
all apologies if not.
I’m sure Criterion would LOVE to get their hands on a QT title.
But the Weinsteins aren’t THAT stupid to give up those DVD rights.
right, considering their dimension films branch is tanking fast.
Quentin doesn’t refer to Tarantino, Quentin’s my name! And the only reason I said that about the TV was just to say they do not get their ideas by themselves, but by other people talking about how great a certain film is. perhaps they read Roger Ebert’s ‘Great Movies’ books. I don’t even have a digital antenna for my TV, so it’s sole purpose is for DVDs.
Quentin, can you elaborate on the issue? It sounds like you have a problem with the films Criterion releases but i don’t understand what it is. Are you saying they shouldn’t base their choices on critical acclaim? What do you feel should be the, um, criteria for their releases?
What the hell makes you think a group of professionals who deal in film would get their ideas by passively waiting to hear about other people talking about something? There’s just absolutely no rationale behind that assumption.
Just a thought. I didn’t state it as fact.
You’re absolutely right, Quentin. They decided to release Grand Illusion and Sansho the Bailiff after they heard some guy talking about it on TV. I’m glad someone calls it like it is.
EDIT: ps: don’t be shy, Quentin. Your post was really well thought-out.
Can everybody just forget about the TV example I used? I used that as an example! I’m just saying-I don’t think that criterion personally views all of these films. Heck, I didn’y even say it was a bad thing. I just put it out there to see if anyone else agreed with me.
yeah i figured your name was quentin. that whole tarantino thing was my lame attempt at a joke. i actually didn’t think you were QT.
I think Criterion releases the films they can get distribution rights for.
Wow, I feel really dumb now Edward. I really thought you were being serious.
Ok, I think what Quentin is trying to get at is: how does Criterion choose their films? Is there a board that decides such things? Is there one executive who makes most of those decisions, perhaps with veto power? I wouldn’t mind seeing a behind the scenes peek at how the company is run, similar to pieces that I’ve seen on Pixar. The information that’s on the internet about the actual company seems to be rather scant. Incidentally, I recall reading years ago about an upcoming movie featuring a father and son obsessed with the Criterion company who attempt to go and visit the home offices. I never saw anything that came of that and I’m assuming it never got made. I wish I could remember more details.
Jay- That is actually exactly what I was wondering. But for some reason I thought I would get better answers if I made people mad by suggesting that criterion watched TV and used other peoples ideas of good films. It was actually kind of funny.
I assumed you were calling out Criterion for being canonical, though I think several of their releases over the last few years would disprove that.
I wonder too, do they have a board like the Modern Library that chooses their titles? Of course rights enter into it, but where does the impulse originate? And why does David Fincher get to release “Button” through Criterion? (Hard to believe, that one.)
You know Greg, Benji Button is exactly the reason I started this thread. That movie is so not worthy of the criterion treatment!
Oooohhhh… this is just another “this film isn’t worthy of the Criterion treatment,” thread.
Uninteresting
Criterion has the right to release any film they want. Does the release of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button make Sansho Dayu any worse? No? Then why are we complaining?
As someone who works in DVD, I can tell you Criterion doesn’t base their decisions by passively waiting for others to mention good films. Of course the company views any film they even CONSIDER releasing. This might be a shocker to some people but they may decide to release a film and then halfway through the process and decide to push it out to a later date or drop it from their schedule completely. And marketing departments are always is the driving force and I expect Criterion is no different.
Their website clearly states they want to release both classic and contemporary films and while you may not like Benjamin Button in the collection, it sells a lot of DVDs so they can afford to release Sansho the Bailiff. It’s the equivilent of asking why Steven Soderbergh makes Oceans 11 or John Cassavetes acts in Devils Angels – its pays for them to then go off and do what they want to do! There’s a reason why companies like Facets or Kino can’t afford to restore and release films like Criterion can. And in the case of Criterion, I actually believe it’s less cynical than that – I think they actually like having a well rounded collection of both new and old films because it might entice people who may have never heard of Grand Illusion to check it out because it’s released by the same company that released Rushmore.
I didn’t say that was the topic of this thread, only the small spark behind it. But this thread is gettin’ dumb because nobody knows how criterion is run, no one is willing to even think that perhaps criterion isn’t perfect. I guess it was a stupid idea for a thread in the first place…
Who said Criterion was perfect? They’re far from it. Benjamin Button, and the numerous terrible films they’ve released prove it. Plus they lack any sort of representation of the Eastern film world (which is including all of Asia (India, Middle East, China, Sth. Ea. Asia), and even Eastern Europe), one of the deepest reservoirs in the entirety of the film community.
They do, however, have the right to release any film they want to.
There is a lot of garbage in the Criterion catalogue. But I think any film lover would kill for about 10% of what they have released. Some fluff, sure, but they are a godsend if you know how to sort your way through the over 450 titles.
OP = Newb.
quentin
Criterion definitely has great films, and has great packaging and features, and I own many of them, but I think that the only reason they have these movies are because they heard someone talking on TV about a great film, and the the criterion people are like ‘Ooh! Let’s make that film into a 2-disc edition!’ Does anyone else think this?