I really hope this sells well, and leads to a Ray eclipse.
“Apu” has apparently appeared on the list that Criterion posted on Facebook.
Well, I’ve already got a Korean release of the Apu Trilogy, so I’m hoping more for an Eclipse for more obscure films of his.
Criterion finally decides to take a chance on a film from a non-Western, non-First World country. They might release an Ousmane Sembene film in only 20 more years at this rate!
And with one of my favorites! The Music Room was hypnotic, even on the shitty transfer I watched last year. I will buy this the day of its release and watch it again.
Not much of risk there Blue, given the rise in disposable income happening in India.
Within 20 years might be stretch for Sembene …..
“Criterion finally decides to take a chance on a film from a non-Western, non-First World country.”
Now now—someone’s forgetting their very fine laserdisc release of Why Has Bodhi-Dharma Left for the East?.
Criterion had problems licensing the Apu Trilogy. If people realized that sometimes that a films home country won’t allow a film to be licensed (Taiwan won’t license A Brighter Summer Day.). That wouldn’t be their fault. They can’t license everything.
Do some research about the reason why they aren’t being released before you complain.
I’d rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it. Besides people would still bitch if Criterion didn’t exist.
Here at MUBI, CC is perceived as a huge corporate entity.
I’ve done some research on Criterion as an organization.
I’m not willing to pay Hoover’s 30$ to find out, but I would guess they are not possessed of unlimited resources – much of which has to do with their tax structure.
I was a financial controller of such an organization and I was told this:
“You’re like an anesthesiologist. Your job is to keep the patient breathing slowly and deeply, but not to let the patient wake up.”
Translation: “We are not interested in wild-ass growth strategies. All we want is that the goose keep laying golden eggs.”
lol
“Here at MUBI, CC is perceived as a huge corporate entity.”
Which is a gross, gross over-statement. Criterion is a third-party company.
If people did more research about the company…..
@ Ben
It is not that they are a third party company so much as they are a second generation family organization.
Probability suggests that the third generation will drive the thing into the ground and in the process, Criterion-ize Sembene.
I’m surprised the country itself is getting in the way of films being licensed. (Why does the country get a say? The US certainly doesn’t have a say about US films being licensed elsewhere.)
A Brighter Summer Day isn’t getting out of Thai for may be, reasons beyond financial agenda.
Well, I picked up an all-region version on ebay, so I have my copy.
It’s surprising to me to hear in countries like India and Taiwan, the government has that kind of power over its citizens’ artistic output.
Do some research about the reason why they aren’t being released before you complain.
I’d rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it. Besides people would still bitch if Criterion didn’t exist.
Pipe down, Criterion fanboy. Nobody’s “bitching” about anything. It’s just a sound observation. Compared to other arthouse labels like Artificial Eye, Kino, New Yorker, MoC and so on, Criterion has had an absolutely horrible record of presenting films outside of the Western or First World regions.
For example, Artificial Eye boasts 10 individual DVD titles by Ray in addition to 3 collections. So it’s not just about the most well-known Apu Trilogy.
You do the research before getting your panties wadded in a bunch because your favorite DVD label with the awesome covers is rightfully called out for glaring oversights in their catalogue and stated mission of being dedicated to “gathering the greatest films from around the world and publishing them.”
They. Can’t. Release. Them. Because. They. Can’t. Afford. It.
A small company can’t release a Sembene film because they can’t afford to purchase distribution rights to the film, restore it and find things to include on the disc etc.
I merely mentioned facts and made a statement and apologize if I offended anyone. Goodness.
I’m pretty sure all of those companies are smaller than Criterion, yet find some way to release films from outside of the First World countries. Kino has been very impressive with their Blu-Ray releases in particular, putting out films with great A/V that will definitely not make them rich by any means.
Theres a lot that Criterion does very well, but Blue K is undeniably right in this case.
I’m not denying him being right and he should know that he is. I am merely trying to present evidence for the counter argument.
Criterion is far from perfect but I am more than happy to be getting a quality release of a Ray film. And I hope it will an indication of the future.
“It’s surprising to me to hear in countries like India and Taiwan, the government has that kind of power over its citizens’ artistic output.”
In most cases, I don’t think they do, although, like any business, negotiating video rights can be quite different from country to country. I think the important concept to keep in mind is that there are almost always more challenges to a company like Criterion releasing a film than simply deciding that they’d like to release it.
“Compared to other arthouse labels like Artificial Eye, Kino, New Yorker, MoC and so on, Criterion has had an absolutely horrible record of presenting films outside of the Western or First World regions.”
On the other hand, New Yorker going out of business and leaving their catalog in limbo didn’t exactly do the cinema a favor.
@Blue
Are you saying CC should stop with the features, cover art, packaging, and etc to distribute a deeper library of films?
If so, let me ask you something:
Distribute them to who?
Perhaps if you invested some of the vast family fortune in distributing films you feel are important you would see how markets work – realize how Hollywood, Criterion and all the structures act as gateways to cinema.
How Criterion forces Artificial Eye, Kino, MoC to pay attention to basics like transfer quality.
Eventually you will find that the problem isn’t so much distribution, but the audience preferences i.e. King Fu (Jujutsu, Kenjutsu, Kendo, Iaijutsu, Naginatajutsu, Sōjutsu, Judo, Sumo, Karate, kikkubokushingu, and etc).
You will have to compromise: to get people to watch a Sembene film on post-colonial impotence you must have 4 or 5 Kung Fu in your portfolio.
Once you have all that in balance, you can stop by MUBI and listen to complaints that you have way too many Kung Fu !
lol
I have to somewhat disagree with you on this Robert. It is certainly the case that the main Criterion label acts in a way similiar to what you describe, but their Eclipse label doesn’t focus on cover art, features and the like. It seems to be intended to do exactly what Blue is suggesting, and they have brought some extraordinary films to the general public, but the range of their focus is limited when it comes to areas of the world and this has recently caused them to release films that are less interesting than others from the same general time and covering the same sorts of themes as the ones they have released. The recent Dearden set and the Matarazzo set are, to my mind, nowhere near as interesting as a large amount of other films from areas that have been almost completely ignored by Criterion.
It may be that some of those films do have rights issues, or perhaps they have some deal with certain studios to allow them access to some directors without an additional outlay of money, but if it is the former, it is a little hard for me to believe that it is more difficult to gain the distribution rights for filmmakers from Mexico, India, Egypt, or some African or South American countries than it is to get the rights for the filmmakers they have released films from like Suzuki, Dearden, Lubitsch and the like. It leads me to suspect that they either aren’t very familiar with the films from those other areas, or much more likely, that they believe there isn’t a market for these films which would be very sad indeed and would border on an assumption of racism or cultural superiority of Europe and Japan. Perhaps they are right, but it would be nice to see them test this theory since the films themselves are almost certainly better so there would be an actual gain in quality. It would be sad to think that people devoted to seeking out hard to find or lesser known films would be so adverse to filmmakers from outside the usual circle of countries Criterion seems to focus on, so I would have to imagine that Criterion giving some attention to other areas would prove to be a boon for cinema given their position in the field.
I would also think it would possibly prove to be more valuable to the types of genres they have been putting out as in the most recent case with Matarazzo, they are emphasizing the wild melodrama aspect of the films, but they really aren’t that wild compared to so many others, which leads me to suspect that the release might not be as popular as it could have been, which could make them less likely to go down that road again even though they might have had better success with the same genre by selecting a different director to focus on. I obviously don’t know what their deals have been or their bottom line is or what success each release has had, so I can only speculate, but that’s all anyone else can do as well, and some of us aren’t sold on the idea that they are making the right decisions simply because those are the ones they’ve made, and we are interested in making it clear that there are those out here who do not require films to be from a small group of countries and would like to see more adventurous selections. Saying this may fall on deaf ears or not be given any attention since they have their own plans, but continuing to raise the issue also might help gain some further interest in the idea from others or just possibly might raise the interest of the folks at Critierion after all. It isn’t just here on Mubi we are bringing this up, but it is obviously something that does arise here fairly often as well, and I don’t see much of a problem with that when the discussion terms to Critierion since it, if nothing else, balances out the fans who seem to think they do little wrong.
Ya know, forget that. If you had the money, what kind of idiot would go into distribution?
Be a producer – send a letter to your favorite filmmakers and say you will fund a serious message where two kung-fu gals have sex. Isn’t that what Tsai Ming-Liang does? Lots of kinky sex and violence around a message of some sort? Think about it: Kids sat through 6 hours of dragon tattoo girl just to see Salander have sex with the kikkubokushingu gal.
Actually, now that I think of it, who would be fool enough to take that risk?
Better to sit back and clip bond coupons …
Heh. So, kikkubokushingu is your word of the day Robert? I like it a lot more than kickboxing anyway…
Bond coupons? I haven’t heard that since my grandma was around…
There are rumors of Tsai Ming-Liang films being released………..
I had to go there Greg – hey, rates are going up – just follow Bill Gross’ lead !!!
Not sure where we are disagreeing there Greg.
This is a curious juxtaposition though:
racism or cultural superiority of Europe and Japan
CC is motivated by fact that the yellow and white race are culturally superior to the black and brown race?
Is that how racism works? two races gang up on the others?
Is that how the film distribution business works? it is populated with racists?
How about this: CC is a business with an upscale model – that model has to being alignment with a market or CC goes out of business.
simple as dat kids !!!!
I said an assumption of racism, which means that they seem to suspect that films from the less developed nations, which are more often people with darker skin, aren’t as attractive to buyers as films from the “first world” or Europe. Japan is the outlier that prevents the discussion from merely being Europe, but the Japanese culture has a different relationship with the US than almost all non-white nations so that exception is understandable if that is their thinking. Japan is seen as more of an equal competitor than other nations in Asia, and most certainly than those in Africa, South America, and the non-Israel part of the Mid East as far as I can tell.
Upscale then implies a belief that cultures that have had mroe financial success as a whole are the only ones worth paying any attention to? Those upscale folks that are buying Eclipse sets can’t accept the idea that there just might be an artist from, say, Mexico that would have anything to show them? That’s a harsh attitude. If they have some evidence of that I’d like to see it. It isn’t as if we are talking about the culture as a whole here after all, just those likely to purchase fancy schmancy movies from an “art” film distributor, so those people should skew liberal and should, theoretically, be most interested in getting their hands on the most exciting films out there regardless of where they are from since I would think that’s who goes for Eclipse sets primarily.
The question would also be that even if it were true and that is how people think, wouldn’t that thinking come from not being exposed to films from elsewhere as much as anything else? Which is kinda the point of some of the complaints, to stop reinforcing bad information.
The thought seems to be, if Criterion distributes it, people will buy it – I think that is a misunderstanding of proper marketing technique.
Here’s a guy lamenting the marketing of Lisbeth Salander for Fincer’s film.
Rants and Raves Lisbeth Salander
Hey – no shit they have to change her image !
Otherwise, why not just distribute the original film?
My point there Greg: the market determines what is sold, not the distributor.
So you’re saying there was a big market for Matarazzo films out there? Sorry, but I don’t see it. Their deal was to try and emphasize the “wild” nature of his melodramas, except they aren’t that wild, which is why I brought up some filmmakers from the same era making the same sorts of film who would fit that definition better. The market doesn’t determine what is sold, it can only select from the options being presented, not presenting certain options will by default mean those things can not be tested on the market. Criterion obviously believes the films they choose will sell enough to make at least some profit, my argument is that their view of what will sell is either based on some idea, right or wrong, that those who buy Eclipse sets won’t be interested in films from areas outside of Europe and Japan regardless of whether the films are better than those they do release, or they have some other motivation that isn’t clear to any of us. Simply suggesting that they are doing the right thing because they are doing it doesn’t make any more sense for Criterion than it would for any other company who puts out products some of which sell and some of which don’t.
Nikhil Jayakrishnan
At last, a glimmer of hope for those who want to see quality prints of Satyajit Ray films. Come July, Criterion Collection will be out with Ray’s ‘Jalsaghar’ (The Music Room) on DVD and Blu-Ray. We hope Criterion will come up with more of his work.