Why is "Persona" not on Criterion?
Rumor has it that the people at Criterion hate Persona. They think, like me, that it’s Bergman’s most overrated movie.
haha they won’t pay the licensing fee
hhaah nathan! XD
Like Peabody said, simply rights. MGM wanted to hold onto it, presumably. Maybe Criterion made an offer that MGM could refuse.
Maybe they will try and make a Criterion version of it and maybe not. I have a copy of it that comes in a box set with The Passion of Anna, Shame, Serpent’s Egg, Hour of the Wolf and a special features disc. It was issued by MGM/UA. I think the version I have is okay. I don’t particularly like the commentaries that are given by a Canadian priest or former priest I believe, but it has some interesting documentaries that are included with each film and a good special features disc. For me, I think I will settle for the one I have. But that shouldn’t stop Criterion from making their own copy of it.
I also heard that Persona doesn’t have the the market value that Bergman Island has.
“I also heard that Persona doesn’t have the the market value that Bergman Island has.”
Which sounds funny to me because I’d expect the average cinephile or at least foreign-film goer to have more interest in “Persona” over “Bergman Island”.
Bergman’s most overrated? Nah, can’t agree with that. It’s my personal favorite from my favorite filmmaker.
MGM just paid for John Kirk’s restoration of the film (see the 2004 DVD release), so they’re not going to license it and miss out on getting all the return on the investment they can.
Matt, with a serious answer, FTW.
For those you sincerely don’t know this, Criterion can’t just make their own version of things. They have to purchase the rights (which are generally exclusive). If you see two versions of a film, one is either out of print or a bootleg. Judging by Matt’s response, I would say waiting for a Criterion version would be a waste of time.
Not sure why they didn’t grab Face to Face when they had the chance….
There need to be more rigid rules for entry into public domain that aren’t circumventable by corporations like Disney. Companies being able to monopolize a classic work of art is a little ridiculous.
Surely not more ridiculous than, say, Renoir or Matisse paintings locked away by some private collector somewhere. Or does mechanical reproducability automatically entail a different standard?
Well, I think if Criterion makes a new restoration and translation of a classic, they should own that version that they made, but they shouldn’t have full control of the original source material.
The equivalent with paintings is if the private collector could sue anybody who showed anybody a photograph of their painting.
cuz it sux
Yeah, I wish they would release “Face to Face” because I haven’t seen it and as far as I know it’s not available on DVD!
Um . . . yeah it is, actually. Olive Films just released a DVD of it a couple of weeks ago.
Jon
You would think, being such a high profile, art house favorite by a legendary director it would be a given, yet Criterion has not released it. Why is this?