Danol?

It's naïve to assume that just because you don't like a company (for whatever reason) that those who do are obsequious worshippers.

The reason people get excited when they hear that one of their favourite films is going to be released by Criterion is that they know that Criterion will do it right: a great transfer, fascinating audio commentary (from the company that invented the commentary), decent documentary extras, an insert, nice packaging - and that "faith" isn't based on people wanting to buy anything that Criterion puts out - it's based on a proven track record.

Sure, not ALL of their releases are worth buying - but speaking only for myself I can say that I've NEVER been disappointed with a blind buy from the Criterion Collection.

I happen to own both of the Bay titles from Criterion, as well as several Fellini, Kurosawa, Hitchcock, and Godard films. I find them all worthwhile. I love the films, I like their presentation on DVD, and don't think that $40 is too much to pay for what they offer (although admittedly I rarely pay more than $25 at retail for them).

Criterion is probably the largest of the niche producers, but if they had to rely on the income from two or three titles driving the entire 250 title production they'd be bankrupt. Their titles all sell - some more than others - but their recent "Rules of the Game" release was one of the best-sellers for January. It's hardly a blockbuster film - but it's generally considered to be one of the greatest films of all time (see the past five Sight & Sound critics polls) and Criterion did a wonderful job bringing it to DVD.

If they didn't, you can be sure people would have complained.

So, how is that hypocrisy?

Of course, they are a business, as they should be. Should they only exist to serve your wants and not making any profits? If they weren't making any money, they couldn't exist. It appears you are failing to understand capitalism and the free market.

Professor Echo:

[sarcasm]Thank you for this enlightening thread exposing Criterion's money-grubbing hyposcrisy. You seem to have taken it as your life's work to give these Criterion charlatans their comeuppance, and I commend you for it.[/sarcasm]

I tire of these monthly/weekly/daily Criterion hatchet jobs on this and other boards, in which a litany of grievances against the company is aired:

• Criterion DVDs are too expensive.
• They release too many obscure, foreign films I've never heard of (and I hate reading subtitles).
• They release too many crappy popular films.
• [insert title of 1998 release] has a horrible, non-anamorphic transfer, which proves Criterion is overrated.
• People are suckered into buying Criterions because of the spine numbers.
• Michael Bay's presence in the collection undermines the CC mission statement.
• Warner/Fox/Disney/Anchor Bay/BU have much better releases than Criterion.
• Criterion doesn't always release the best version of a film on DVD.
• Criterion collectors (i.e., anyone who owns more than 10 releases) are lemmings/obsessive-compulsive completists/elitists/fools/fetishists/devil-worshippers.

From the postings on this board, one would think that Criterion and, by extension, the consumers who purchase their titles, are the personification of evil. Several points to consider (none of which is original in this never-ending debate):[list=1][*]While Criterion is revered by many, it has also received a level of scrutiny far out of proportion to its number of releases.[*]I've never heard any Criterion "defender" suggest that the company is perfect, though that's the standard against which it's measured by its critics.[*]Historically, Criterion developed and perfected the "special edition" treatment of films on laserdisc; they have continued that tradition on DVD. Their innovation has driven other companies to improve their own releases.[*]Criterion has the most responsive customer service in the business.[*]Criterion's new release announcements generate excitement because the company has proven, time and again, that it is capable of extraordinary things (though not all releases are definitive, flawless, or "masterpieces").[*]The last time I checked, collecting DVDs isn't a crime. People collect for myriad reasons which might seem inexplicable to you or me, but in a free society, that's their right. People should be able to collect teapots or Archie comics or seashells or Criterion spine numbers without justification.[*]Criterion releases have been improving over time. If they start to decline in quality, so will their sales.[/list=1]

By continuing to dredge up ancient history (Armageddon and The Rock were released in 1999 and 2001, respectively; Criterion's subsequent releases have shown that this was not a trend), and resurrecting Peter Becker's words from 2000, Professor Echo, you undermine your argument, and are left looking silly.

Yeah, what FilmFanSea said.

I think #3 on your list is what most people either fail to realize or choose to ignore. Do you like your jam-packed DVD special editions? You have Criterion to thank for that... no matter what company released it.

Criterion invented the audio commentary and the concept of 'extras' and 'supplements' on a film. They were the first company to come straight out and say "If we're going to put a film on laserdisc... we're going to use the best available source prints. And try to get the directors and cinematographers involved in the video transfer." In the late 80s/early 90s, when other companies were still slapping transfers on LD that they were using for VHS, Criterion was talking with Kubrick, Cronenberg, etc. about how to best present their work on home video.

Other companies learned from this -- and many of them started producing their own packed LD releases. (Some that in many ways were much better than most of Criterions efforts.) And this trend continued on to DVD... to the point where if a movie doesn't have 4 commentary tracks, bloopers, and a documentary that's longer than the feature, people call it 'bare-bones' and ask if they should hold off for a better edition.

Criterion started all of that. They are the best thing to EVER happen to home video.


But, putting all of that aside, and maybe even pretending that they don't deserve the respect of everyone with a home theater or DVD collection... the fact is that they release a lot of movies that I like and they do a great job of it. I don't blindly worship them, nor do I own every single film they've released... But I do own and enjoy nearly 50% of the titles they've put out. I can't think of any other company that comes close to that for me.

LOL

Alright, since my last response was removed, perhaps with good reason, let me say this much and hope it passes the censors:

The argument on this thread keeps shifting and getting twisted,not just from what I wrote originally, but from all my subsequent replies, few of which I think have been read and considered. (FilmFanSea, I appreciate all your points, but most of what you write had been addressed in the reply that you quoted).

So let me conclude my participation in this thread by saying this:

No company deserves blind adulation and unbiased devotion, no matter how good their product is or seems. I don't think it benefits anyone other than the manufacturer when you buy something you don't really want or need just to fulfill an arbitrary standard of completion or that you have inherent trust in a brand name.

Despite what so many on these boards seem to believe, Criterion is not almighty and they don't need unwavering faith, they need to be consistently challenged to keep producing good DVDs. The responsibility of their most ardent followers should not be just to cheerlead, but to make sure they don't, as I said before, rest on their laurels. I saw hypocrisy in that interview, but I acknowledged in a follow up reply that in another interview, that hypocrisy was more or less dealt with. Thus, I stated that had I of known that, I would not have started this thread.

We may not agree on all the merits of Criterion as a company, but in the first line of my original post I said I respected them and I will continue to do so as long as they make a good product. However, no company will ever get an unconditional and unqualified seal of approval of me. There are always questions to be asked and answered in this corporate driven world we live in. And if you don't agree with me on that, then we can at least agree to disagree and move on.

Deleted. If you don't like a thread, show your disapproval by not posting and letting it drop off the front page. - Static

Had to look that word up. I can usually expect a word I have never heard of when FilmFanSea makes a long-winded post. Good stuff.

One last postsript to this thread and then I'm out of here:

They say if you work for Disney, "never ever f--k with the mouse."
Apparently if you want to post on these boards, you never ever
f--k with Criterion. That's truly pathetic. But mob mentality won't scare me or intimidate me from posting. I'll continue to call 'em as I see 'em and I'm on these boards to stay. Have a nice day.

I think I've finally figured this out. Is your real name Omarosa?

I think you are taking these discussions a bit too personally. I say this in the nicest way possible; I don't think people care one way or the other if you are here. They have the option to put you on ignore or just not read/respond to your posts. If they respond then you obviously aren't bothering them to the extent you probably think.

Just relax. I sometimes think people care more about just being heard as opposed to what they are actually saying. If your agenda is to become well known or respected on here arguing & pushing your views down the throats of others isn't the way to do it. Eventually people will see your posts & just ignore them or read your thoughts, be uninfluenced, and move on.

Edit: Trying to phrase that last sentence without being redundant is pissing me off.

Thanks. You're right. I'm still relatively new here and despite what anyone thinks, I have never set out with one of my posts to piss anyone off, just to express my views and make them think a little. Isn't that the reason why we all post? I've been guilty of threadcrapping and I wish I wasn't, but sometimes the fingers don't wait for the brain before they start typing. If you've read my thoughts on these boards you know I am passionate about what I say, but I'm never a slave to it. I do see other people's points of view and am willing to listen and change my own in the face of a well thought out position. I'm going to try my best to rise above the threadcraps, both posting and responding to them, and just continue to have fun on these boards.

I don't think its wrong to follow Criterion blindly. I don't because of limited resources but if I won the lottery tomorrow I'd have the complete Criterion collection by Sunday. Anyway, its like having a subscription to a magazine. You are a subscriber, thus receiving issue after issue every month without ever reading the mag before purchasing it. Because you trust the magazine will be pretty entertaining and informative you pay before you even receive it. It's the same thing with Criterions its just a little bit more money.

Okay . . . preface . . . this first sentence coming up is not meant to be any kind of attack or anything like that . . . keep reading and you will understand where I am going . . .

I'm sensing that you've been burned by someone or something in the past, because this seems to be an issue of trust for you. I am not some one who is a diehard Criterion addict (I own 18 and will be adding a handful more . . . maybe 5 or 6 . . . in the next month or so), but I have been way more than pleased with every single Criterion disc that I have purchased . . . both in the quality of the film as well as the presentation and the supporting features on the DVD. This includes the numerous blind buys that I have done of Criterion discs (many thanks to the members of DVDTalk for the excellent recommendations ).

As such, I have developed a trust in Criterions products. I trust that if I buy a DVD that they have released, they will have done their absolute best to present the film and the supporting features to the best of their ability at the time. I also trust that, if it is a movie that I have not seen (assuming that I have done some research into the film to make sure it will be of some interest to me), that it will be a movie that excels in some area of film . . . whether that is directing, writing, cinematography, etc. . . . or some combination of these areas. Until they disappoint me, I will continue to trust that they will live up to their past "performance".

On the other hand, it almost seems like you feel that their accomplishments are a fluke or something and that they are bound to fail one of these days (probably a observation that is slightly exagerated in comparison to your actual feelings, but I'm just trying to illustrate a point ).

I don't know . . . maybe it's just a case of an optimistic view vs. a pessimistic view of the same situation.

Professor Echo:

I still don't understand the depth of your anger. Are you a disgruntled, former Criterion employee? Did they refuse to release your favorite film on DVD? Are you the president of Wellspring or New Yorker? Did you pay too much for an OOP Salo?

I've read and re-read your posts, but I still don't understand. You have the righteous anger of an Erin Brockovich, but I think it's totally misdirected in this case. If you need a cause, take on Columbia TriStar or Paramount or New Yorker, but why pick on Criterion?

Yeah, why not get pissed off at MGM for releasing badly chopped Pan & Scan-only versions of their back catalog, or Paramount for their poor performance with special editions, or Universal for forced trailers and repeatedly botched packaging decisions?

There's much for purists to complain about when it comes to DVD releases, but heck, the Criterion Collection is hardly worthy of this degree of ire. Perhaps there's a thread devoted to Warner's Snapper cases that you could add some of your energy and copious free time to (seriously).

How many times will you promise this before it actually comes true?

We get it already. You've beat the same dead straw horse over and over again. We understand. Criterion is not above criticism. You are cooler than the rest of us. We get it. Enough already.

DJ

This is a good point. You need to pick your battles and the battle you picked was against a strong company with a weak argument.

But the thread brought out some really nice posts (by both sides) and it was a very nice read.

So they sell "non-classics" to make $$$$$$$. I have no problem with that.

Criterion is not the only company that lists items like these as "extras". For any DVD producing company to list these items as extras is completely ridiculous & an insult to our intelligence.

Until both of these are ubiquitous, I wish all DVD companies would list whether they are present. For example, New Yorker is infamous for using single-layered discs on 95% of their releases. Likewise, Lion's Gate should have closed-captioned their recent Morvern Callar (rife with thick Scottish accents).

I don't think Criterion is trying to justify the retail price by listing these as extras (they're actually listed as "Special Features" on their website), they're merely describing the DVD.

I gladly subscribe to this notion. This degree of loyalty must indeed be earned.

One need only to look at Criterion's track record to know they have more than earned thier following.

Consider me blind and unbiased...


NEXT!


Jimmy

fixed that one for you.

I don't really see what makes Criterion better than any other company. I've tried out a couple of their discs, which are no better than many of the other discs in my collection that are put out by different companies. Sure, they have some really great discs in their catalogues, but so do companies like MGM, Warner, Anchor Bay, and Blue Underground. What is the point of paying ridiculously high prices for an otherwise average disc?

The point is... you do not HAVE to buy it. If you believe a film (by any studio) is average and overpriced... just say no.

For some reason, some people just don't understand something so simple.

I'm wondering if the people who complain about Criterion's "ridiculously high prices" have figured out yet that you actually don't ever have to pay full retail and, with the barest modicum of research, you can find buy most Criterion discs for under $26 shipped, and many for less than $20.

Or do they pay full retail and then get pissy when they realize that they failed in their due diligence?

Curious...