Criterion’s Eclipse?

Reader Comments

1. Martha 04/07/2006 @ 7:57am

   It’s actually likely that the Cure cover is a bootleg/fake - if you wander around eBay, or grey market Asian sites, it’s not uncommon to see Criterion covers on films that have nothing to do with the company. Just people trying to make a buck off of the blind-buy fandom you describe.

2. glenn 04/07/2006 @ 8:28am

   criterion sucks. they are pricing this stuff out of the range of even people such as myself. The new Kwaidan coming out of the UK is going to be nicer than the US Criterion AND—AND—will still end up being cheaper—even with the US dollar’s poor performance—than the Criterion.

   AND why so many Japanese films and no Korean or Chinese films?

   AND Chasing Amy? You have got to be kidding me. Equinox? Come on.

3. Kurt 04/07/2006 @ 9:52am

   Oooh, such negative energy on fans of Criterion? Well the word fan does come from ‘fanatic’ and I would suggest than any label or product, or etc. which has ‘fanatics’ they will—by definition—adore the product.

   Criterion, Masters of Cinema, Anchor Bay and other DVD-‘Brands’ do a good service of bringing an ‘approved’ sampling of their ‘genre’ (for lack of a better word) to non-experts and semi-experts alike, and serve as a guided gateway. Of course, the companies have guiding tastes, and such, so they could just as easily be treated as a persons recommendations, taste is subjective, and Criterion certainly has some oddballs in its collection (Armageddon anyone, even after they put out The Rock…That’s 2 Michael Bay films folks!), no collection is ever going to appeal to everyone…The very fact that these companies are ‘quirky’ in that way, makes them feel less like an institution and more like a colleague….

4. Brendon 04/07/2006 @ 9:53am

   I popped that logo up on Film Ick yesterday, looking for people’s comments. I got a whole bunch of speculative e-mails, but no leads on what is really going on with the new line.

   Criterion earned their place on this earth with just a handful of their titles. And they’ve responded well to criticism. Long may they continue.

5. collin a 04/07/2006 @ 10:14am

   I can’t understand being blindly allegiant to anything, really. Good movies are good movies, whether you have a Criterion, Blue Underground, or Goodtimes VHS copy. I’ll buy from whichever’s releasing an interesting film I may / already do appreciate.

   I’m all for a company like Criterion, which treats films with great respect and strives to assemble excellent all-around packages, to offer that sort of treatment to a wider catalog of titles. Here’s hoping it happens.

6. scoville 04/07/2006 @ 11:04am

   Just remember that the higher price point and the Bay titles are the things that help fund the restoration of the finer/less known films that Criterion releases.

7. evergreen 04/07/2006 @ 11:16am

   They’d need Eclipse to do this? They already have Armageddon on their regular line.

8. glenn 04/07/2006 @ 11:32am

   here’s the thing every one forgets: on laserdisc Criterion owned the rights to the Janus Films catalog and had about 200 more films that they released amazing lasers of. The DVD specializes in marketing—not selection—as they don’t have the rights to the same films anymore.

   2nd point is this: I know a few people who are collectors types—don’t know much about film at all—but they buy Criterion discs because they are numbered and marketed as limited editions. These are the same people that buy EVERY release from a band like Guided by Voices or whatever. Anoraks they call them in the UK.

   The point is that Criterion on DVD is not getting people into good film; they are creating collectors. That’s it.

   The Fox Truffauts are nicer than the Criterions anyway.

9. collin a 04/07/2006 @ 11:44am

   I have to (respectfully) call BS on part of that, Glenn. I agree, there are people who collect for the sake of collecting, but to say Criterion’s titles aren’t capable of introducing people to good films and function primarily as fodder for collectors simply isn’t true.

   There is no absolute here - some people will buy the discs because they’re numbered and go out of print after a time - others will buy them because they’ve heard about, let’s say, Fritz Lang or Jacques Tati and want to see their work but haven’t had the chance, or they know Christopher Nolan’s INSOMNIA was based on a foreign film and want to see the source material. It isn’t one or the other, it’s both.

   Personally, I’ve been exposed to a lot of great flims I might not have otherwise seen dating back to the days of Criterion’s LD releases of Bergman.

   Additionally, I work at a University where the most comprehesive course in the US on Orson Welles is taught, and in my job capacity have done a lot leg work with the course’s instructor in collecting and making materials presentable. Criterion’s releases of F IS FOR FAKE has proved an incredibly useful teaching tool, and their upcoming release of MR. ARKADIN will likely prove to be of similar use.

10. Peter Martin 04/07/2006 @ 11:58am

    I think the Criterion loyalty stems more from the usually high technical quality of the releases rather than (necessarily) the selection of films. They were *the* company in laserdisc days, but with the advent of DVD, more companies have emerged worldwide displaying similiar high standards. That’s very good for film fans.

    Most any company that doesn’t focus on a small niche market will have releases that range all over the map, as a reflection of the tastes and interests of that company—as well as what they think might sell. Nothing wrong with that.

11. El 04/07/2006 @ 12:10pm

    I love Criterion when it’s a movie I want to see. I know I’m getting their best efforts at restoration in the original aspect ratio, something quality, and special features that aren’t throwaways but something worth watching (and learning from). I’ll never forget getting the Fear and Loathing release and spending almost half a day watching the film and special features on that disc. They know how to put on the ritz, and lend respectability to a film that may be underappreciated by many.

12. pobe 04/07/2006 @ 12:48pm

    A simple visit to http://www.dvdbeaver.com which posts fairly technical and detailed comparisons of various editions of DVDs will show you one empirical reason why people get excited about Criterion releases. Criterion were one of the first to embrace massive amounts of supplemental material, and always have a high technical standard for their releases. While I have had the misfortune of meeting in real life and reading online opinions of these silly “blindly loyal” Criterion fans, I don’t see how your opinion of these people should relate to the label itself. It’s a good label that has often set the standard for DVD releases. The films they put out are often considered world classics before they are released by Criterion, not becuase they are released by Criterion. It really seems like you (logboy) have a chip on your shoulder, and don’t seem to know what you’re talking about at all.

    As for Eclipse, from what I understand it will be the “cult” line, meaning competition for other cult boutique labels like Blue Underground, Mondo Macabro, etc. Criterion owns and has owned the rights to several cult movies and this new label is rumored to be an outlet for this stuff.

13. jandrew 04/07/2006 @ 1:12pm

    “AND why so many Japanese films and no Korean or Chinese films?”

    The majority of the Japanese films released on Criterion are from hugely influential filmmakers like Ozu, Kurosawa, and Kobayashi. Please tell me (aside from the locked down Shaw Bros titles) any non contemporary Korean and Chinese directors/films who should also be considered? The Korean film industry is like 10 years old and aside from John Woo’s limitedly released Criterion titles, there’s nothing really there for the label.

    But yeah, they should definitely put My Wife’s a Gangster 5 out in a 2 disc set.

14. glenn 04/07/2006 @ 2:21pm

    okay, too much hostility.

    yes, Criterion got me into Ozu’s Tokyo Story BUT as soon as I had an all region player I could see all the other Ozu films that Criterion has no intention of releasing.

    2nd: Maybe I am being harsh but really for anyone with a memory of more than 10 years should agree with me on Criterion’s selection on DVD vs. their old laserdisc selection.

    And say what you want about no “Criterion-worthy” HK films but is Chasing Amy that good? Even Royal Tenenbaums? I mean, come on.

    Admittedly their Last Temptation of Christ is an amazing product BUT the first DVD I purchased was their Seven Samurai and I was disappointed at how few extras there were AND the picture quality is not as good as I thought it should be for $40 friggin bucks.

    People who genuinely love film should not rely on this place AND when I was in college and broke I managed to see a lot of great films in other venues.

    Criterion is helping only people with the money to burn. I make more than 50k a year but I will be damned if I will pay $40 for most of what Criterion puts out. I would rather buy the R2 from the UK for half the price and limited extras.

    For every success story of something they’ve done right, there’s another barebones $40 disc staring back from the store shelf.

    And proof of the absurdity is that people will pay $300 for the Criterion Salo out-of-print DVD BUT for $300 you could buy an all region player and 10 UK R2 editions of the damn thing.

15. Stan 04/07/2006 @ 2:44pm

    Glenn, seriously, get off the UK R2 thing. Did you just buy your R0 player yesterday? You’re way too excited about this.

16. ds 04/07/2006 @ 3:14pm

    “The Korean film industry is like 10 years old and aside from John Woo’s limitedly released Criterion titles, there’s nothing really there for the label.”

    ohoho. i think if you read twitch you might know that was another golden age of korean cinema in 50-60. i saw only one movie from that period (“Obaltan”) and it was realy great and classic.

    in China there was shanhaiese prewar movies, premao movies and taiwanese 60s movies from such great directors like King Hu and Li Han Xiang.

    and there isn’t any remasters of King Hu classics like “Dragon Inn”, “Touch of Zen” or “Valiant ones”, only Mountain dilogy and Shaw Bros’ “Come drink with me” available. Criterion should make them

    i’m sorry for my english.

17. Rhythm-X 04/07/2006 @ 3:32pm

    Korea’s film industry is ten years old? Wow, then that would make this year 1929.

18. glenn 04/07/2006 @ 3:40pm

    ok i unleashed too much hostility i think.

    i am harping on the R2 thing because yes, if you are in the US with a R1 player, Criterion is your only place to get the Kurosawas. That’s all. I just don’t like that kind of monopoly.

    i like the ability to buy anything anywhere and have it play in my player and not be told “oh in the US you have to pay $40 for Seven Samurai” or whatever.

19. Rhythm-X 04/07/2006 @ 3:52pm

    Thinking about the post saying that the Korean film industry was ten years old and there was nothing worthy of a Criterion release from Asia that wasn’t Japanese -  one smartass remark is not nearly enough to address such colossal ignorance. Then again, maybe Criterion is hiring - with an attitude like that, jandrew would fit right in. Or maybe he or she works there already. It would explain a lot. Why insist on non-contemporary films/filmmakers? God knows that there’s enough contemporary American filmmakers represented in the Criterion Collection - is Michael Bay somehow more worthy than Fruit Chan or King Hu of inclusion? Is Im Kwon-Taek, who I guess was just pretending to make movies before the Korean film industry started ten years ago, not really up to the filmmaking standards of Kevin Smith?  I’d love to see THE ARCH someday. Or the original WONG FEI HUNG films. If only they were Japanese, Criterion would probably have released them a long time ago. But they’re not - they’re Chinese, so they don’t matter in the Criterion scheme of things. F*** Criterion. I won’t call them racists - but damn, is it ever so tempting.

20. Rhythm-X 04/07/2006 @ 3:59pm

    Racist isn’t right at all, actually. That was uncalled for on my part. When it comes to Asian cinema, they’re merely snobs, looking down their noses at all that is not Japanese (or IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE). But, they’ve got a chance to correct some errors with this new label, and I hope they can do that.

21. glenn 04/07/2006 @ 4:27pm

    I do think Criterion are somehow anti-Chinese. I mean apart from the Kurosawas they put out a lot of genre films—the rebel samurai and whatnot. Okay, maybe they are great but guess what—King Hu’s films are great, the Shaw Brothers musicals and dramas are even better. There is something weird about the preponderance of Japanese films in their DVD releases.

    But I don’t care cause Tartan does a better job anyway with the Korean titles.

    Agreed, Kevin Smith is wildly overrated and Chasing Amy is amateurish at best.

    And while I used to like the film, Metropolitan is also wildly overrated—Criterion put it out cause it was a hard title to find on any format so they had an excuse to charge $30 for it.

    So yes, Criterion are providing a service by putting out a nice edition of Metropolitan but it is hardly a masterpiece worth sitting next to the Welles and Kurosawas in their collection.

    Rhythm-x is right.

    In the perfect world, Criterion would put out all the Johnnie To films in editions comparable to their other stuff.

22. Rhythm-X 04/07/2006 @ 4:50pm

    Don’t agree about Kevin Smith being overrated - I think he’s rated about correctly. There’s perfectly good reasons to hate Kevin Smith movies as cinema, but for all his weaknesses, for me there’s something oddly endearing about his films. They are what they are, and they’re for a certain audience, with little regard for those people outside of that audience - except for JERSEY GIRL, and even his fans shunned that one. Even his most pointless and excessive movies (hello, JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK) have made me laugh, a lot. I’d like to see another director take on one of his scripts someday - or perhaps Kevin Smith co-directing with someone else, Alan Mak/Andrew Lau-style. But Im Kwon-Taek, he is not - and I suspect he’d be the first person to admit it.

23. Yojimbo 04/07/2006 @ 5:11pm

    Anyone who thinks that a $25-30 price point is “introducing” audiences in general to a whole new world of cinema has a loose bottle cap! I have been involved with the video industry for years and I can tell you this, Criterion has ostracized more of the general audiences than enticed them. Personally, I enjoy my Criterions but I also know that not too many folks are willing to “test drive” The Seven Samurai for $25-30!!

    Besides, with HDDVD and B-Ray, looks like the current Criterion discs may already be obsolete? No?

24. Kurt 04/07/2006 @ 5:51pm

    Yojimbo: Not true, Not true. Libraries, Zip.ca (Or Greencine, Netflix, etc.) are all ways to get a Criterion disc on the cheap, keep it for a week, and take it back. Espeically, the ‘bare-bones’ criterion discs. For someone getting into art-cinema, just browsing their catalogue is has value as a kind of survey. It’s also interesting to see which filmmakers they tend to mine (Kurosawa, Suzuki, Anderson, Bergman, Welles, Bunuel, Cronenberg)

25. gingersoll 04/07/2006 @ 7:50pm

    Say what you will, but Criterion’s release of Ran makes every other edition so far look like a joke—including the R2 Japan release.

    Yeah they are still trying to live in the LD era with their prices, but they put out good discs with packaging that isn’t plastered with “THE GREATEST MOVIE EVAR!!- Joe Sigel”.

    It’s true that there are many other great companies out there today that weren’t around in the LD days, but that doesn’t make criterion somehow invalid just because they have a higher price point. If people didn’t buy their releases prices would come down, but people do. As a business they are going to use their high price to “confirm” the quality of their releases to the public. It’s just business, folks.

    Try coming over to Japan, where barebones discs of crap no one cares about has 4000Y prices tages. And if a film is worth buying, well good old Toho/Bandai/Shochiku/ect is going to make sure you pay an extra 1500Y or so.

    I know that doesn’t help you guys who have sane dvd prices in your country, but any criterion release is avalible in R2 or R3. Sometimes it is worth the extra $ to get their version, sometimes not. For me, their versions of Naked Lunch, Robocop, Ran, Video Drome, and several others were woth the price.

26. Bill 04/07/2006 @ 8:07pm

    “yes, Criterion got me into Ozu’s Tokyo Story BUT as soon as I had an all region player I could see all the other Ozu films that Criterion has no intention of releasing.”

    Criterion is planning to issue around two dozen Ozu films, but they require restoration and work on the special features. For example, Donald Richie recorded a commentary for “The Only Son” over a year ago. Hell, the Eisenstein silents have been in work for more than six years because the company refused to put out inferior versions.

    As for the Chinese/Korean issue, you need to remember that Criterion needs to license their films and faces much more competition from the Tai Sengs, Sony Classics and Miramaxs of the world than they did on LD. On LD, they released films like “Citizen Kane”, “King Kong”, “Casablanca”, “The Wizard of Oz”, and other masterpieces that they couldn’t get a sniff of these days. “Bullet in the Head” has long been on their wishlist, but they can’t the rights (although they said they check every year or so).

    If you don’t like what they are putting out, e-mail them with suggestions. They do listen to their customer base. Look at the outrage over the “Viridana” cover a few months back.

27. Josh 04/07/2006 @ 8:49pm

    Somehow Criterion is the enemy of cinema? Not buying it. They do a great job with what they put out, they release a lot of (not every!) wonderful films and maybe their price points are a bit high, but they obviously put a lot of care into the quality of the transfer, supplemental materials, and packaging, so it’s worth it for some people. Those of us who can’t afford to buy them, like me, for the most part, can always rent them. If they were the only company out there releasing DVDs, I’d have many more complaints. I mean, it’s a shame we can’t see a Criterion DVD of Aimless Bullet (aka Obaltan, indeed a great film), or The Housemaid, or Mandala, say, but there are half a dozen other companies in the US that could also put those films out and haven’t. When we complain about them releasing Chasing Amy or Metropolitan, we are holding them to a pretty high standard, and that alone tells me that they are, overall, doing an outstanding job. Our film culture is richer for their existence.

28. zausted 04/07/2006 @ 10:41pm

    Imagine what kind of person you have to be to get so up in arms over your little quibbling problems with Criterion.

    “For every success story there is a $40 bare bones disc sitting on the shelf.”  And they don’t ever even include a warm bottle of milk in their extras! Boo hoo!

    “F*** Criterion. I won’t call them racists - but damn, is it ever so tempting.”  uh, wow.

    Last night a woman with no shoes was begging for change on my street corner. If you don’t appreciate Criterion, don’t buy their discs, for chrissakes.

29. Rhythm-X 04/08/2006 @ 2:14am

    I’m sure the woman begging for change on your street corner appreciates your spirited online defense of the Criterion Collection.

30. Yojimbo 04/08/2006 @ 2:41am

    Kurt, sorry to let you know this, but there are many libraries that do not carry Criterion titles. Sure, there may be some or many in certain large market areas that do, but midsized to smaller markets simply cannot afford to consider them, the largest reason for this has a lot to do with cost and high risk of theft. I know this because I have asked. I know that my community libraries only carry them if donated. Rentailers such a Blockbuster and Hollywood seldom carry them because of their high shrink potential and believe it or not, a lack of interest by most of their customers.

    For instance, my local Blockbuster has one of the highest traffic rates in its region, but you’ll only find two Criterions in the whole store. The same with the two stores further down the road. The Hollywood videos near us carry more but most of those are on VHS.

    Remember, the area or region one lives in is a very relevant factor in the context of the discussion.

    Thankfully, since the advent of online renting, more Criterion titles have become more accessible to general video viewer. But then, that accessibility has nothing to do with any effort on Criterion’s part, no; it has more to do with Netfilx and Blockbuster’s desire to provide these titles to their members.

    From what I understand, unless there is some profit sharing agreement, Criterion doesn’t benefit at all from rentals.

    Even if more libraries and rentailers did carry more Criterion titles, how does this suggest that Criterion caters to a broader market? How often do you see them in Wal-Mart? Target? Even Bust Buy, for the most part, only carries the more current releases. Not too long ago, I went into a video store that was independently owned. I asked why they didn’t carry very many Criterion titles. They told me it was because they were both overpriced and a SPECIALTY item.

    (In fairness to Criterion, the are some retailers *COUGH* *Borders!* *Cough* that could offer a slight price break on their discs but choose to try and gouge the customer with the SRP!)

    As a label, Criterion is virtually an unrecognizable brand to the general consumer. I can’t count how many times I have tried to explain what a Criterion edition is.

    Criterions’ demographic isn’t tots, tweens or teens. It’s certainly isn’t twenty somethings or Grandmothers or Grandfathers. Actually, they can circumvent the usual demographic model because they are more of a connoisseur product.

    I know at first glance it appears that Criterion is trying to expose less familiar, forgotten and classic films to a broader audience, but how can this be when they are charging 25%-50% more for a product that most consumers are not familiar with? Doesn’t sound like “reaching out” to me.

    I recently had a kid ask me if Seven Samurai was worth owning. I assured him that I believed it was. He then went out to purchase it. After realizing that he would have to pay nearly thirty dollars for it off-line, he told me that he wasn’t going to pay that much for a film that he hasn’t seen before. Fortunately, for him, the local Blockbuster did have a copy to rent. Even after he saw it and enjoyed it, he still felt that thirty dollars was too steep for a single film.

    Last week, a friend of mine called and asked if he could burn off a copy of Kagemusha (He saw it on IFC?). I then informed him that a region one was available through Criterion. He told me that he was aware of that but he wasn’t about to throw thirty to forty bucks down on one film. Understand this, this guy is very far from being broke and he knows his film but even he thought the price was absurd.

    I know my brother-in-law won’t even consider buying them.

    Ever wonder how much money Criterion may actually be losing?

    I notice that when most people discuss or debate Criterion, they forget that THEY ARE PROBABLY NOT THE AVERAGE DVD CONSUMER. I know I am not and I doubt that you are as well. Chances are, if you can discuss it, you’re probably the Abby-normal consumer.

    BTW- If Criterion’s Eclipse does have the intention to include any Chinese films, I hope that A Touch of Zen is one of those films!! I could also think of a few more Kung-Fu epics deserving of some Criterion love!!

31. gingersoll 04/08/2006 @ 4:13am

    Um, most people zip right past any movie on ifc or tmc or whatever that is showing something in B&W;and with subtitles. Notice how very few channels show art films? That isn’t because the licensing fees are too high… 

    Unless Jet Li is flying around on wires, or Jackie Chan is doing crazy shit. Then subtitled movies aren’t too bad.

    SOME people out there love art cinema, but they are far and few between. It is NOT the job of a small niche market video company to educate the masses, it is their job to produce a quality produce and sell it on it’s own merits.

    If criterion started releasing their films in crap packages, skimping on the restorations and extra, ect to get their films to a walmart price, what would be the point?? I’m sure a few people would pick up a copy of Naked Lunch with their 3.99 chuck norris flic, but they would promptly return it upon finding that there was neither nakedness nor lunch in the film.

    I know I sound like I’m saying the average person is a nitwit. I’m not. But the average person is NOT interested in watching Bergman’s 4 hour tale of an unhappy couple. I am. And IF I want to have a really excellent version of the film, I am probably going to go to criterion. If I want a more economical version of the film, I go elsewhere—generally speaking.

    So your friend doesn’t want to pay the $$ to buy Kagemusha? CRY ME A RIVER! Tell his ass to go buy a used VHS version of the film off half.com for a buck. Record it off ifc next time it airs. If he wants Criterion’s extras and great restoration job on the film, he should pay for it like everyone else! If he wants a dvd of the movie, why not get the HK release??

    Or, as with Ran, he can spend twenty bucks MORE than the criterion and get an inferior R2 version from Japan. I’ll galdly sell mine.

    Look at the many releases of Robocop. The criterion release is rather old, and yet it is an excellent dvd, with a more film like image than the big studio releases, verhoven’s favored aspect ratio, the directors cut of the film, and has a bevy of great extras—and no Good Morning America quote taking up half the F***ing cover! But guess what, all those nice aspects are gonna cost you. If you don’t like the price, buy one of the many other lesser versions avalible online!

    And I’m not a collector—fact is that I like In the Mood for Love, but not enough to buy Criterion’s version. I’ll pick up a copy of the Korean release some time or a used version. Or maybe just rent it.

    My feeling is that a good movie transends your AV setup. But it sure is great to have the option of a really great DVD of your favorite film, even if it costs a bit more. Time and time again, criterion has been the one to step up to the plate and offer that special version.

32. glenn 04/08/2006 @ 8:21am

    the other thing i think worth making a crack about is that—correct me if I’m wrong—but Criterion sells predominantly to the US and Canadian markets. So for those of you who are defending Criterion, is that to say film fans in England or France are less enlightened film fans cause they can’t get the DVD’s with the Criterion treatment?

    I’m being a smart ass but you get what I mean.

    Scorsese and his ilk in the 1960’s didn’t have Criterion (or DVD for that matter) and yet though reading and rep theaters and revivals they still managed to see more and learn more about film than any of us will ever do.

    I’m just sick of these people who own a shelf of Criterions as if they can just buy the knowledge.

    AND if you put a number on anything and label it limited edition, someone will buy it no matter what the price.

    So, in sum, Last Temptation of Christ worth $40, Chasing Amy…not.

33. x 04/08/2006 @ 9:15am

    Criterion : DVD = Faux Bourgeois : Society

34. Tuan Jim 04/08/2006 @ 9:37am

    I enjoy the criterions that I own, but there are certainly ones out there that I wouldn’t drop my $$$ for.

    As I’ve heard from other threads, I am pretty disappointed about the drop in titles between laser and dvd—specifically “Baron Munchausen” because I really want a Gilliam Trilogy.

    That said, I highly recommend checking out local college libraries and indie stores. University libraries are generally very well-stocked - for free.

35. Shlomo Epstein 04/08/2006 @ 10:49am

    Criterion is anti-chinese and anti-Korean. But also, don’t forget they are also anti-Indian AND anti-Semetic. How many Indian films have they released? ZERO. NADA. ZILCH. India releases more films than any country in the world, and yet they can’t find one release worthy of their collection? Fine, you can’t find a single good Bollywood film, thats understandable. But to pass up on Ray and other non-Bollywood Indian greats? Unbeleivable.

    It still inconclusive to 100% determine if Criterion ant-semetic yet. They haven’t released a single Israeli film, yet they have released Battle of Algiers and films from Germany. If they release Olympia by Nazi sympathizer Leni Reinfenstahl, then we’ll know Criterion’s true feelings towards Jews.

36. collin a 04/08/2006 @ 11:04am

    This thread has turned very hilarious.

    First off, why the hell are people trashing Logboy? For what, espousing his opinion and asking some questions? Isn’t that what everyone who’s posted a reponse to his initial post is doing?

    Second, I’m not entirely sure where you guys are shopping, but most of Criterion’s titles (not all, but most) can be had for $30 or less if you go to places like Deep Discount DVD or DVD Empire. During Deep Discount’s 20% off sale, most of their catalog is under $25.

    Just like anything else, there are good and bad points to how Criterion’s library works across the board. To decry their work and extensive library of titles spanning back to their days of LD releases because they don’t produce discs you can find at truck stops is beyond me. To those living in out-of-the-way locales, can you walk into a video store and find copies of titles from Kino? Zeitgeist? Since you probably can’t, and since the price points on their titles tend to be higher ($20+) are they also not worthwhile companies?

    As film fans (those of us here who genuinely are, anyway), shouldn’t the availability of a title in a version you could conceivably take home and enjoy be paramount? With the thousands of films produced around the world each year, I’m glad there are as many companies out there doing what they do, Criterion included. We need more. We’d be worse off without them. Do you see anyone else releasing FISHING WITH JOHN? How about assembling a version of MR. ARKADIN as close to what Welles had envisioned as possible? Maybe eventually those things would’ve happened, but look at the reality of the situation - Criterion releases plenty of good material which is readily available through retail outlets, online retail and rental, and libraries. And if you don’t like the way those releases stack up, there might be other versions out there. Drop $40 on a Cyberhome DVD at Best Buy and pick up some multi-region discs. That’s the beauty of the DVD medium - there are many ways of getting to see many different types of films, and you can often even buy at a price point corralated to quality which suits you budget.

37. scoville 04/08/2006 @ 11:42am

    http://www.deepdiscountdvd.com/studio.cfm?mainStudioId=36

    You can get Criterion dvds here for about the same you’ll need to pay for most “special/collector’s edition” discs for the next few days.

38. Daniel J. Winclechter 04/08/2006 @ 1:57pm

    Glenn: “I’m just sick of these people who own a shelf of Criterions as if they can just buy the knowledge.”

    Got news for you buddy, it’s not Criterion’s fault that there are idiots in the world. There’s a lot of really lame commentary in this thread based solely on the perception that people let Criterion dictate their viewing habits. Maybe there’s some truth to that, maybe there’s not, but none of it should reflect on whether or not you appreciate Criterion’s library.

39. ranemaka13 04/08/2006 @ 4:08pm

    “the other thing i think worth making a crack about is that—correct me if I’m wrong—but Criterion sells predominantly to the US and Canadian markets. So for those of you who are defending Criterion, is that to say film fans in England or France are less enlightened film fans cause they can’t get the DVD’s with the Criterion treatment?”

    I know I’ve probably missed your point, but I saw plenty Criterion in Paris….....

40. Yojimbo 04/08/2006 @ 7:12pm

    Gingersroll, I’d like to agree with much of what you say, but I am afraid you’re overlooking a couple of things.

    To begin with, Criterion would not have to scrimp their product to get it into larger retail stores. However, by not getting them into a more accessible retail venue, the argument that they are strictly a collector’s label is justified. How can one claim that they are giving more “obscure” films greater opportunity to be seen when their product are not available at the more opportune retailers?

    As we are seeing, the technology to restore films is becoming more and more accessible and cheaper. With that, comes more and more smaller companies willing to restore films are re-release them,  funny things is, not all of them are putting their product out at Criterion prices.

    They are offering restored films with extras at a cost that reflects the company’s desire to get the film into the hands of the consumer.

    And as great as some of the Criterion extras can be one moment, they can be pretty sparse or shoddy the next. Has anyone seen their new Rebel Samurai: Sixties Swordplay Classics collector’s set? Great films but not much really in the way of extras. Pricing wouldn’t reveal that though.

    Even so, sparse doesn’t necessarily translate into cheaper. So the logic behind the pricing must be, “It’s a label thing” or an “It’s an exclusive thing”.

    I have heard all the arguments regarding Criterion’s prices reflecting licensing fees, costs of obtaining certain prints, constructing extras and restoration. But smaller companies still manage to do the same and still put out a pretty decent and reasonably priced product. What about small studios who fork for production, distribution, and advertising costs?

    I recently purchase a cheaper Korean copy of Ikiru because I just wanted to watch and own the film. It may not have been a Criterion edition but then again, I didn’t have to pay more for extras that don’t justify a Criterion price! This approach sounds practical but not too many other consumers are aware of the alternatives or region free players.

    So then, is it possible that Criterion may be priced to take advantage of the ignorant? Maybe? Maybe not?

    I also didn’t use my friends Kagemusha example to garnish any tears. I used him as an example of someone who could easily afford Criterion’s product but chooses not too because forking out lots of money for a single film isn’t practical or logical for him. He’s also not too ignorant.

    There are not dozens of hundreds who feel the same way; there are tens of thousands (if not hundreds)!!

    This usually translates into renting the product and burning it. Now then, how does Criterion benefit from this?

    Now, there is an issue for discussion!

    Does Criterion’s pricing actually induce the pirating, burning and illegal downloading of their product?

    Admittedly, no film is exempt from being obtain illegally, but only a self imposed ignorance would have one believe that Criterion’s pricing isn’t a major factor in the pilfering of their product.

    Me? I was gladly insane enough to purchase Kagemusha.

    As I have already stated, I like their product. However, I would like to see their product at a cheaper cost and more people seeing the films they provide. Even so, I believe they have the right to price their product the way they want. I just would like to reserve and exercise my right to piss and moan about it.

    I don’t expect Criterion to give away the family silver at garage sale prices but don’t convince me to mistake plating for sterling either.

41. Josh 04/08/2006 @ 9:47pm

    Ugh. What do we, as consumers, as people interested in cinema, care whether or not Criterion makes money from rentals of their DVDs? They obviously make some money, because Netflix and Nicheflix and Greencine and (groan) Blockbuster (and anyone who gives any of their money to Blockbuster for any reason is part of the problem, no two ways about it) have to keep some of their DVDs in stock to rent out to us.

    I don’t own a single Criterion DVD, so I’m hardly a collector. I live in NYC, and even here, we only have a few rep houses. Film Forum had a great samurai movie retrospective last year, but as someone who does not have a lot of disposable income, or a tremendous amount of free time, I was not able to see everything I wanted to. If Criterion doesn’t release Kill! I’m not sure how I would see it, and I live in the film capitol of the USA. I’m lucky enough that the local independent video store, which Blockbuster is doing their damnedest to drive out of business, stocks Criterion titles. If not, I suppose I would have to subscribe to Greencine or something. Seems like a reasonable enough idea to me. I can’t understand how anyone who lives anywhere else in this film-culture-deprived country could bitch and moan about the prices or the inconsistent quality of their releases.

    The people complaining here are probably closer to those faux bourgeois no-nothing snobby Criterion collectors than they want to admit, because the only reason I can see to complain is if you want to collect those titles and can’t afford to. To me, cinema is not about artifacts and ownership, it is about the films themselves, and ideally about our communal experience of them, whether it’s in the theater together or sharing our ideas on a great site like Twitch.

42. Yojimbo 04/09/2006 @ 1:03am

    Idealism is nice on paper. But put it between two slices of bread and it can be very difficult to swallow!!

    Your observations could easily be applied to the price gouging that is going on with the oil companies. Let’s try…

    “The people complaining here are probably closer to those faux bourgeois no-nothing snobby vehicle owners than they want to admit, because the only reason I can see to complain is if you want to travel and support your family but can’t afford to.” – Exxon

    If film was simply not about “artifacts” and “ownership” then the industry would simply go belly-up. Therefore, the end of that beloved film communing.

    As much as we would hate to admit it, it’s an industry first and an art form second. I can tell you first hand that the studios would be the first ones to celebrate the death of the rental industry because they are 100% for ownership.

    It is also safe to say that a director would love it more if you purchased their film than rent it. Not out of greed mind you, but renting the product does not generate the capital they need to make more or better films. There are exceptions. But they are just that…exceptions.

    I would agree that film is much more than artifacts and ownership but without either, Criterion would sink like the Titanic because artifacts and ownership is the fuel that keeps them afloat.

    To believe otherwise is not only ignorant but the height of pretentiousness. We don’t have to like it but realistically, we have to acknowledge it.

    Think about it, Criterion, like most; do not rely upon the rental industry to keep them afloat. All the rental industry offers is some extra exposure and a little bit of profit sharing. However, let it all fall into the abyss tomorrow and the industry won’t shed a tear.

    So much for art and idealism!

    So, who is it that keeps the industry afloat? The film goers and those who purchase the films and related merchandise are what keep the industry afloat.

    In otherwords “artifacts” and “ownership”!

    The first priority of cinema is to be seen.

    Every director of every film that Criterion has released wanted first and foremost their films to be seen. The second priority is to have as many people as possible to see their art.

    There have been and are very very few foreign directors who would have not wanted to break through to Western audiences.

    How ironically contradictive it seems that many of them have had their film’s exposure restricted by a price point that can actually hinder the mass accessibility they were trying to obtain to begin with.

    How contradictive is that many of these films originally played for people of much lower income brackets but now cannot be owned by someone, “who does not have a lot of disposable income”?

    My argument is this, if Criterion’s mission is to get many of these wonderful films out there for people to see, then price them comparably and get them into venues that will make them accessible to the audiences they were originally intended for…the general audience.

    If not, let’s call there releases what they are, exclusive specialty items or connoisseur releases or collectors items.

    In a capitalist kinda way, there is nothing wrong with that!

    Have you seen Universal’s recent releases Carol Lombard, Mae West and Marlene Dietrich films? Each actress was given a collection of 5-6 films. Each film has been restored.

    Let’s face it, to the general public, these films are virtually unknown or forgotten.

    Each set is less than $20 at Wal-Mart.

    Eventually, you’ll be able to purchase the collections on sale for around $15 each.

    Know what that tells me about Universal? Well, in this case, it tells me that Universal wants to sincerely renew interest in the films of these three actresses. Kinda strage of a corporate monster isn’t it?

    Criterion just released their 3 Films by Louis Malle collection. A nice collection to be sure, but it costs just as much as all three Universal collections combined and you won’t find him at very many retailers.

    Know what that tells me about Criterion? Malle will remain an “unknown” to general western audiences. Kind contradictive for an artsy-fartsy label that cares isn’t it?

    To ruin the original intent…that is!?

    But is fun discussing it. Thanks!

    BTW- I do apprectiate the nice edition of Kill! Criterion released.

43. Mathom 04/09/2006 @ 1:24am

    “India releases more films than any country in the world, and yet they can’t find one release worthy of their collection?”

      Uwe Boll is slated to release more movies in the next three years than any other director, so they should definitely put him in the Collection.

        On a serious note, I’ve been bugging Criterion to put out Ondanondu Kaladalli for quite a while since Janus already owns the rights to it. I’m sure they’d release it if they thought people would buy it. Perhaps R1 interest in Indian films is the problem, and not Criterion’s desire to release them.

44. gingersoll 04/09/2006 @ 5:54am

    I see where you’re coming from, Yojimbo. Who knows, maybe the upcoming format war will somehow excite more competition in the homevideo market for ultra high quality dvds… but for now Criterion seems content with their current position. And so am I. By the standards of where I’m living, Criterion dvds are a good deal. Expensive, but I’ve always thought of home theater as a luxury—not as a living expense. I don’t have the $$ to buy some of my favorite films here, but hey! they’re MOVIES, not food. I’ll complain when they start charging outragous prices for ramen, but all I care about for my films is when I do buy them, they are of the best quality avalible. If I pay 50 bucks for a film and it has a crap transfer you can bet I’m taking it back, and if the store refuses to accept my return, I’m sending it to the goddamn video company and demanding a return. (if I pay 15 bucks, I’m much more forgiving of course..) 

    But as long as quality is maintained, a company can charge WHATEVER they want—the market will either keep them in business or teach them a lesson.

    I do sympathize with those who want to see films in the collection but can’t afford to do so—I grew up in a little town with a population of 1000! The nearest video store which carried subtitled films (or even hollywood classics!) was 80 miles away. It was hard being a movie lover as a kid, reading about Citizen Kane, Seven Samurai, Fellini, and even good old Malle since 6th grade, but never being able to actually see any of those films… but with the advent of the net (mid high school) I was liberated from my secluded location.

    Now any kid can hop on google and have access to ANY FILM IN THE WORLD as long as it is on dvd somewhere. Might have to save up a bit, but it’s all there. 

    Anyway, I do not think a cheap Malle box is going to fly off the shelves at Walmart. If you can’t even get people to watch the stuff for free on tv (look how few channels show art films), than they aren’t going to pay $ for it. Do you notice how few other art films big chains carry in general? Maybe I spent too many years working at corporate video stores in college, but for the most part, joe six pack doesn’t care about frilly european art cinema or weird ass asian films enough to buy them sight unseen. Criterion is not holding Malle hostage. Anyone can buy his films cheaply on half.com, ebay, overseas region sellers, rent them at netflix, ect. If someone has so little interest in film as to not be able to bring themselves to do a little work on google, they are probably not going to buy a Malle box set, let alone be an enthusiatic fan.

    I would love to be a kid again with a service like netflix. But then again, maybe not having such free access to film has made me savor it a bit more than I would have otherwise done.

45. Justin Slotman 04/09/2006 @ 9:45am

    Yeah—the only possible problem with Criterion is with that portion of their fanbase that thinks “only Criterion is Art.” Yes, these people exist and yes, they are annoying—they’re elitists who want their own High Culture imprint to lord over the rest of us. But the Criterion product itself is pretty great—you just have to disassociate the product from the goofy hardcore Criterion heads.

46. Josh 04/09/2006 @ 1:00pm

    Yojimbo,

    I still don’t care how much Criterion charges for their product, as long as I have access to it. They can charge whatever the market will bear. They’re not in collusion with other DVD companies to keep the price high. They’re not making obscene profits while their consumers go hungry and/or freeze to death. Somehow my saying that Criterion puts out a good product, and that I’m not that concerned about their pricing because it’s not really necessary to own it in order to enjoy it is the equivalent of defending Exxon. Um, huh?

    You are the naive one if you think Universal puts out those box sets, or any other product, with any ideal beyond eventually making money from it. There are individuals at these companies who genuinely love film and care about the quality of the product that’s being put out, and they will always be outnumbered and outgunned by those whose job it is to watch the bottom line. Criterion obviously needs to turn a profit in order to stay in business, too. So thank goodness for those fussy little collectors who keep them afloat and enable me to see their releases for $3.50 at the video store down the street. Whatever Criterion is doing, it’s working out okay for me, and it should work for anyone whose primary interest is in being able to see, if not own, these films.

47. jl 04/10/2006 @ 3:06am

    With the amount of work they put into their releases, I say criterion has earned my money. For instance have you seen their release of Fanny and Alexander? Damn. That’s all I gotta say. I can buy typical criterion dvds online for about $30-40 canadian. They charge $25-30 for new release blockbusters like king kong. I think the prices are fair. Botton line is criterion doesn’t sell many copies and they still wouldn’t if they dropped their prices to match new releases. There just isn’t any demand for them. If your a fan of classic cinema, it’s easy to forget that the majority of the population couldn’t give a fuck about films by kurosawa or tarkovsky. kino’s dvds are expensive too, but they aren’t nearly as well put together as criterions are. Stalker costs damn near $80 and they split it up on to two discs! What the fuck is up with that?! I think criterion is doing a damn good job. All these people that are saying that the high prices prevent people from discoverying these filmmakers, I bet they were introduced to many of them by criterion so quit hating. Finally I would just like to say to the person who accused criterion of being racist, get a life. Anti-semetic? Do yourself a favour and go watch night and fog.

48. jl 04/10/2006 @ 3:07am

    With the amount of work they put into their releases, I say criterion has earned my money. For instance have you seen their release of Fanny and Alexander? Damn. That’s all I gotta say. I can buy typical criterion dvds online for about $30-40 canadian. They charge $25-30 for new release blockbusters like king kong. I think the prices are fair. Botton line is criterion doesn’t sell many copies and they still wouldn’t if they dropped their prices to match new releases. There just isn’t any demand for them. If your a fan of classic cinema, it’s easy to forget that the majority of the population couldn’t give a fuck about films by kurosawa or tarkovsky. kino’s dvds are expensive too, but they aren’t nearly as well put together as criterions are. Stalker costs damn near $80 and they split it up on to two discs! What the fuck is up with that?! I think criterion is doing a damn good job. All these people that are saying that the high prices prevent people from discoverying these filmmakers, I bet they were introduced to many of them by criterion so quit hating. Finally I would just like to say to the person who accused criterion of being racist, get a life. Anti-semetic? Do yourself a favour and go watch night and fog.

49. Yojimbo 04/10/2006 @ 4:18am

    Gingersoll

    SOrry for the long post but this is one of my favorite topics of discussion.

    I respect your opinion but I don’t think you are seeing everything from a broader perspective.

    I would agree with you on your assessment about “joe six pack” and his resistance towards foreign and art film. I can’t tell you how frustrating it gets to have someone tell me how much they love horror films and when I suggest an Asian horror film to them, they reveal how fickle that “love” of horror film really is.

    Isn’t it amazing what subtitles can to a conversation?! *LOL*

    Of course, like you, this frustrates me to no end. Not because I am some sort of film elitist, but because I find it odd that one would relegate their film choices on the basis as something as minute as subtitles.

    A few years ago, I went into a Wal-Mart located in an area so rural, it would make Larry the Cable Guy look like a metrosexual! In my usual OCD manner, I made my way back to the electronics department to scope out the CDs and the DVDs. Since I know that Wal-Mart usually tries to cater to the specific area a store may be located, I was hoping to find something a little different than what I would find at the store in my town.

    Imagine my surprise when I found a stack of the Andrés Segovia: A Centenary Celebration box set sitting on one of the cash wraps! Being a huge classical music fan, I was stunned to see such a set in a Wal-Mart that carried more country music than R&B;! What stunned me even more was the fact that it was only fifteen bucks (at the time it was going for @$50.)! Needless to say, I latched onto one of these gems. In my excitement, I made my purchase right there. During the purchase, It to have the cashier tell me that she was surprised to see how well they were selling. She had personally never heard of Segovia but she had to admit, she was now curious to learn who he was.

    Obviously, this is the exception and not the rule but it does show some possible potential of what could happen when an item is given both exposure and priced in a way that may provoke a curiosity purchase. Of course, it would be purely speculative on my part to believe that Criterion’s Malle box set would sell as well if given the same situation, but it is also speculative to say it wouldn’t.

    Admittedly, I don’t believe that Criterion is obligated to give their product away just to squeeze a sale but a few gems thrown out there at a tempting price would benefit them, the filmmakers and the audience to a great extent. More importantly, interest will grow in films that deserve more attention than they are currently getting.

    You wanna know what I do to those horror fans that are resistant to foreign horror films? I offer to come over to their home with one of the better films and watch it with them. If that’s not convenient, I loan them one of my backup copies. It keeps ‘em from stealing my originals! *LOL*

    I am sure many of you folks do the same.

    A free showing of some of these films has incited more interest in the “resistant” than any method the most savvy advertisement company could ever conjure up.

    I also agree with you as to the accessibility of these films now as compared to 10-15 years ago. But as I have tried to articulate before, if Criterion had to rely on rentals to survive, they wouldn’t.

    Ironically, accessibility is actually one of Criterion’s biggest enemies!

    As the DVD burner has taught us all, accessibility does not translate into profits.

    Of course, Criterion hates the fact that their product is getting downloaded and stolen off the net. Let’s also not forget the bootlegs!

    Their SRP is a DVD pirate’s/bootlegger’s dream! Not only does the label mean sales but how easy is it to sell a $40.00 DVD for $10.00? And let’s not fool ourselves; some of those boots are of more than acceptable quality! Quality breeds quality!

    I also couldn’t count the number of college students or military personnel who have ripped copies of their films off the internet!

    By the way, from what I understand, the military has some of the nicest decryption and burn software and hardware in the world and how it does get utilized! *LOL*

    I once met a guy who told me that he had access to over 30,000 songs and movies from the computers at his job. Many people in his company pool their collections together and make them accessible to everyone there. Any Criterion?

    “How do you think I get my Kurosawa stuff!” is what he told me.

    You may personally want the best copy possible, but “free” is the great quality compromiser for millions of people. Speaking of that…

    How about the overwhelming sense of “entitlement” that drives everyone to steal music and film? I surely am not the only one who has heard someone say that they swipe music and film because they feel the music and film industry has been screwing them with their prices for years?! It’s that same sense of “entitlement” that drives the technology that contributes to the theft.

    So then, they may not be able to beat it, but how does Criterion combat this? By ignoring it? By telling us how illegal it is? By calling it theft? By continuing to offer their product at a price that makes them an easy and profitable target?

    I may like their product. But my heart bleeds purple panther piss in regards to their (even more so Disney’s) approach to the download and bootleg problem their product has experienced. Don’t even get me started on the bastards in the Anime industry!

    Why?

    Because they (like Disney) esteem their label above a practical approach to the problem!

    They could offer a film only alternative but they don’t! (Maybe that’s what this Eclipse is?)

    They could offer their product at a lower price but they choose not too! Let’s remember, Criterion may restore and enhance films and produce some neat extras, but they had nothing to do with the higher initial cost of producing or advertising of the film! Hell! They don’t even own most of their films! But they’ll charge twice as much as those who do?

    Now that I think about it, the fims Criterion does seem to “own” (Chasing Amy, Life Aquatic, Etc.) have sold for less than $20 at Wal-Mart! WTH? Imagine what a $13.87 copy of The Seven Samurai would do at Wal-Mart!

    They could offer their films in VCD, DVD-5 and a DVD-9 format and different price points but this solution is “below” their standard!

    Sure, we could easily dismiss this all as being Criterion’s problem, but because Criterion can obtain sole rights to a film for a period of time, these decisions can hurt us as consumers.

    I really don’t believe there are too many legitimate reasons for swiping music or film. But there are also not too many reasons why companies like Criterion won’t dabble in alternatives because they want to sell a restored version of a public domain film for $30.00!

    I hope your right. I hope the format war will lead to some competition. I hope this leads to lower price points. But from what I understand, this may not be the case for some time. In the process, the sense of entitlement will win out, Blu-Ray and HDVD will lead to better bootlegs and downloads and Criterion will become but a memory!

    I don’t want that to happen but in a “buyer’s” market, you’re right to price your product any way you want means two things…JACK AND SHIT!

    And Jack just left town!

    Thanks for the back and forth on this!

50. Yojimbo 04/10/2006 @ 7:58am

    If the criteria for a high price point for a DVD is:

    The amount of effort that went into the restoration and the extras.

    I tell you what folks,

    Go out and purchase a DVD called “Popeye Original Classics from the Fleisher Studios”.

    Order it online and you’ll get it for only $8.00-$10.00.

    It contains 10 Popeye cartoons (132 min) that have been restored from original 35mm material by Thunderbean Animation.

    It also contains these extras:

    Four page color liner notes.

    Interviews with Jack Mercer (Voice of Popeye), Mae Questel (Olive Oil), Jackson Beck (Bluto) and the original animators.

    Still art of original animation art and posters.

    Behind the scenes photos and interviews.

    A visit to Chester, Illinois- Home of Popeye (Documentary)

    Original 1933 Sing Along with Popeye

    Soaky TV Commercial

    1939 Pencil tests

    Popeye meets the Beach Boys

    Popeye Carnival ads

    Making of Popeye Mini Doc.

    Dedications

    After you get this, go to Wal-Mart and get the dollar discs that have the colored cartoons of Popeye Meets Ali Baba and Aladdin and His Wonderful Lamp (Popeye).

    Compare them to the versions on the Thunderbean release. Be amazed!

    Afterwards, ask yourself this, how in the hell can a small company such a Thunderbean offer so much for so little and a larger and better known company such as Criterion would have charged you 3-4X more for the same product?

    Anyone who knows anything at all about film restoration knows that restoring animation can be a far greater task because of the fact the most of the more popular toons, such as Popeye, saw far more use, abuse and less storage care than many live action films.

    Seriously, if you love animation, get this! You’ll pee yourself giddy!

    Its efforts such as this one that make me call into question Criterion’s price motivations at times. If you look, there are also plenty more good examples!!

    Look at the Zatoichi films series! Restored and all, once and a while, you can find them on sale for $10-12 each. And who produces most of those again?

    What about the Celestial Shaw Brothers film collection?

    They are using 30 professionals to restore 760 films frame by frame; they are also restoring the sound on each film.

    Even with all that, you can purchase these Region 3 imports for $9-16 each! VCDs are even cheaper!

    I have some VCDs of some of these and the quality is astounding! For a VCD that is.

    So again, outside of some possible “greed” where is the justification for Criterion’s prices when so many others are putting out great restored products for far less?

    There is some good discussion on the issue but there is very little comparative discussion? Anyone else know of some good examples?

51. nsuody uierwqs 06/17/2007 @ 1:35am

    sczoaldw jmepwalfg zxoqhuknf kvfptabw ihvdstalk ecisfqjhu mbnpaet
    ——-

Post Your Comments

• Next Entry
• Previous Entry