wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Jesse Edwards, Nov 5, 2003.

  1. Does anyone have the Criterion Version of RoboCop that I could get a
    DVD-r copy of cheap? I want all the extras, menus, etc.. with it
     
    Jesse Edwards, Nov 5, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jesse Edwards

    Murder Guest

    (Jesse Edwards) wrote in news:1217-3FA878AE-407
    @storefull-2172.public.lawson.webtv.net:

    > Does anyone have the Criterion Version of RoboCop that I could get a
    > DVD-r copy of cheap? I want all the extras, menus, etc.. with it
    >
    >



    Y'know it's ironic. I got desperate a couple of months ago, and I was
    going to sell my Criterion Robocop (among others) for about $6 at the
    local used DVD shop, and they wouldn't take it at all. I explained that
    it was an out-of-print Criterion edition, and they just sort of shrugged.
    But that's Criterion's problem- they charge twice as much as the market
    for movies that can scarcely be called Special Editions. The Criterion
    Robocop has no features on it that are worth a second look. At one time
    it could be explained that they released obscure movies that no one else
    would bother with, but no more. Every week there are fairly obscure
    movies that get SE releases that far exceed Criterion in quality extras
    for $15-20. I say that it's time for Criterion to get in another line of
    bussiness, or try competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etcetera. Or has
    Criterion already folded?


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Nov 5, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jesse Edwards

    jayembee Guest

    Murder <> wrote:

    >Every week there are fairly obscure movies that get SE releases that
    >far exceed Criterion in quality extras for $15-20.


    Name them.

    >I say that it's time for Criterion to get in another line of bussiness, or try
    >competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etcetera. Or has Criterion already
    >folded?


    No, they are still going strong. They're up to 215 releases, and
    counting. The fact that you don't recognize their value is irrelevant.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Nov 5, 2003
    #3
  4. Criterion (was Re: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r) (was: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r)

    Murder wrote:
    > But that's Criterion's problem- they charge twice as much as the market
    > for movies that can scarcely be called Special Editions. The Criterion
    > Robocop has no features on it that are worth a second look.


    Well, except for the director's cut of the film, which I've found to be
    worth a third or fourth look, easily. :)

    (More on this below.)


    > At one time it could be explained that they released obscure movies that
    > no one else would bother with, but no more. Every week there are fairly
    > obscure movies that get SE releases that far exceed Criterion in quality
    > extras for $15-20.


    Here's last week's release list, as posted in rec.video.dvd.titles:

    <http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vpuu0g81bsnra6%40corp.supernews.com>

    Please feel free to point out the obscure $15-20 SE releases that surpass
    Criterion's editions.

    And the "obscure movies" thing still holds true: with or without extras, I
    haven't seen any other companies in a big hurry to release _Schizopolis_,
    just to pick a title off the top of my head. Or _The Passion of Joan of
    Arc_.

    In most of the cases where a film has been released by Criterion and
    another company, whether in parallel (_Arma- *euch* -geddon_, _Fear and
    Loathing in Las Vegas_) or in succession (_RoboCop_, _Sid & Nancy_), I've
    found the Criterion editions to be either equivalent or superior to their
    major-label counterparts, albeit sometimes on different grounds.

    Let's look at _RoboCop_, your test case. There's the Criterion disc, the
    MGM disc...and the old (OOP) Image disc, which I think we can safely say
    isn't really in the running quality-wise.

    The MGM disc has a newer transfer and it's 16:9-enhanced. It also has a
    5.1-channel remix. And it lists for $20. That's nothing to sneer at. (I own
    this disc, so I'm not just saying this out of politeness.)

    But MGM's disc doesn't have the director's cut of the film, or his
    preferred 1.66:1 framing, or the commentary track, or the original stereo
    soundtrack. And those are things that I think are worth having.

    It's quite true that the Criterion disc costs more: back when it was in
    print, it listed for $40 (I'm sure it's more now on eBay). But I don't
    regret having bought it.


    > I say that it's time for Criterion to get in another line of
    > bussiness, or try competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etcetera.


    They *are* competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etc. And apparently they're
    doing okay in that competition: if they weren't, I'd expect to have seen
    some changes in their approach. Instead, they're releasing pretty much the
    same mix of obscurities and foreign films (and a few mainstream flix) that
    they've been doing since they moved into DVD.

    "Competing with" doesn't necessarily mean "doing the same thing as."

    doug

    --

    ---------------Douglas Bailey ()---------------
    Ah, but I have secrets; and there's a story in me -- it starts...
    --Wire
     
    Douglas Bailey, Nov 5, 2003
    #4
  5. Jesse Edwards

    ML-78 Guest

    > Y'know it's ironic. I got desperate a couple of months ago, and I was
    > going to sell my Criterion Robocop (among others) for about $6 at the
    > local used DVD shop,


    Why would you do that when you can sell it on eBay for about $35-40?

    > and they wouldn't take it at all. I explained that
    > it was an out-of-print Criterion edition, and they just sort of shrugged.
    > But that's Criterion's problem-


    Your local shop's ignorance is their own problem, not Criterion's.

    > they charge twice as much as the market
    > for movies that can scarcely be called Special Editions. The Criterion
    > Robocop has no features on it that are worth a second look. At one time
    > it could be explained that they released obscure movies that no one else
    > would bother with, but no more.


    Who else has bothered with a special edition of The Devil and Daniel Webster,
    just to take one of their more recent examples?

    > Or has
    > Criterion already folded?


    Errm...


    ML-78
     
    ML-78, Nov 5, 2003
    #5
  6. Jesse Edwards

    Murder Guest

    jayembee <> wrote in
    news::

    > Murder <> wrote:
    >
    >>Every week there are fairly obscure movies that get SE releases that
    >>far exceed Criterion in quality extras for $15-20.

    >
    > Name them.



    Well, I said they come out every week. It would be pretty silly to "name
    them" for your benefit, wouldn't it? How about Kino's versions of Faust?
    How about Kino's version of *anything*? How about Blue Underground?
    Retromedia? Image? All specialize in obscure titles, all priced $15-20
    dollars, with extras (except Retromedia titles which generally have no
    extras, but are priced $10 or less).

    But hey, don't let your feelings get hurt over my opinion. I don't care
    enough about the subject to rassel over it. I'll just spend my money on
    reasonably-priced DVD's, and have more of them!


    >
    >>I say that it's time for Criterion to get in another line of
    >>bussiness, or try competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etcetera. Or has
    >>Criterion already folded?

    >
    > No, they are still going strong. They're up to 215 releases, and
    > counting. The fact that you don't recognize their value is irrelevant.
    >



    That sucks. I hate it when I hear about a title I covet being snatched
    up by Criterion. That means it will be grossly overpriced and come with
    extras that. typically, are utterly worthless (Fear And Loathing appears
    to have some nice extras, but I can live with the Universal Edition that
    I got for 1/4 the price of the Criterion). Other companies produce
    actual featurettes and documenteries. Criterion gives you stuff that was
    available, but that no one else would think of wasting disc-space on.

    Their Carnival Of Souls has two different versions of the movie on two
    discs, with a difference of about four minutes of scattered,
    insignificant footage between them. They put two versions on the release
    just to justify jacking the price way up. They basically did the same
    thing with Haxan, throwing in Witchcraft Through The Ages in as the
    alternate version. The trouble is, Witchcraft Through The Ages is the
    only version of the movie that fans under the age of ninety are really
    familiar with (I know I prefer it). As for Robocop, the "excessively
    violent" extra footage only ads up to a few moments, as far as I can
    tell. Aside from the commentary (which other companies also deliver,
    remember, at half the price) the extras include an essay that could have
    just as easily been put in the insert (who wants to read an essay on the
    teevee screen?), some storyboards (Ooooo! Boy, that makes it worth
    $35!), trailers (found on all but the shoddiest, bargain-bin DVD
    releases), and, um, it's dual-layer (and what isn't, nowadays?). That's
    why no one will buy the damn thing- because their databases tell them
    it's way over-valued, and won't sell any better than the junk version.


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Nov 5, 2003
    #6
  7. Jesse Edwards

    ML-78 Guest

    > How about Kino's versions of Faust?

    Good release but is available in a better version elsewhere.

    > How about Kino's version of *anything*? How about Blue Underground?
    > Retromedia? Image?


    Good companies, although Retromedia has made some appalling releases. Most of
    them are, however, not as consistently releasing high quality DVD's as
    Criterion, who usually take greater care of their transfers (not saying the
    other companies are not). Criterion has released several titles that were
    previously available from Image and always improving them.

    > That sucks. I hate it when I hear about a title I covet being snatched
    > up by Criterion.


    Do you hate seeing them improved over the version that was already available?

    > Their Carnival Of Souls has two different versions of the movie on two
    > discs, with a difference of about four minutes of scattered,
    > insignificant footage between them. They put two versions on the release
    > just to justify jacking the price way up.


    No, they put both versions on there because true movie fans would want the
    option of choosing either.

    > They basically did the same
    > thing with Haxan, throwing in Witchcraft Through The Ages in as the
    > alternate version. The trouble is, Witchcraft Through The Ages is the
    > only version of the movie that fans under the age of ninety are really
    > familiar with (I know I prefer it).


    Err, Witchcraft Through The Ages is just the shortened (about half an hour),
    narrated version of the original film. No movie fan would care about it if the
    choice was between that and the original, though they appreciate having them
    both - just as Criterion made their DVD.


    ML-78
     
    ML-78, Nov 5, 2003
    #7
  8. Jesse Edwards

    Murder Guest

    "ML-78" <> wrote in
    news:boaf2s$1ali$:

    >> How about Kino's versions of Faust?

    >
    > Good release but is available in a better version elsewhere.



    Oh? The Murnau version, or the Svankmajer version?


    >
    >> How about Kino's version of *anything*? How about Blue Underground?
    >> Retromedia? Image?

    >
    > Good companies, although Retromedia has made some appalling releases.
    > Most of them are, however, not as consistently releasing high quality
    > DVD's as Criterion, who usually take greater care of their transfers
    > (not saying the other companies are not).



    Yes, I probably should have left Retromedia off. They've been swallowed
    up by Image, anyway. I probably also should have mentioned that I am
    mostly concerned with the horror genre, which is the only genre that Blue
    Underground and Retromedia really deal in.


    Criterion has released
    > several titles that were previously available from Image and always
    > improving them.
    >
    >> That sucks. I hate it when I hear about a title I covet being
    >> snatched up by Criterion.

    >
    > Do you hate seeing them improved over the version that was already
    > available?



    Fine, as long as there is another version out there to compare it to.
    Criterion announced years ago that they were going to release Equinox,
    which doesn't exist on DVD. That never panned out, I guess, but what
    would be the point in doing a pain-staking transfer of a 1960's shlock
    film that would only reveal all of the flaws? And I would trust Image's
    Something Weird to have better extras. Criterion is all about styrofoam
    popcorn rather than real content. Image would do a suitable transfer,
    perhaps with a commentary, and invariably with lots of fun goodies, and
    how much would they charge? $15! And how about the transfer for The
    Seven Samarai? Not too good, as I understand it. Extras? Nada! Or
    have I been misinformed?


    >
    >> Their Carnival Of Souls has two different versions of the movie on
    >> two discs, with a difference of about four minutes of scattered,
    >> insignificant footage between them. They put two versions on the
    >> release just to justify jacking the price way up.

    >
    > No, they put both versions on there because true movie fans would want
    > the option of choosing either.



    Well, I happen to be a true movie fan, and that disc isn't worth $35. If
    Herk Harvey were still alive, he would probably want to know why they
    didn't just use his cut. You have to compare the versions very carefully
    to find any difference, and then there would be the problem of getting a
    life. You think if they had only included the Director's cut, and priced
    it reasonably, that anyone would have really minded beyond the most
    pathological geeks in need of intense psychotherapy?


    >
    >> They basically did the same
    >> thing with Haxan, throwing in Witchcraft Through The Ages in as the
    >> alternate version. The trouble is, Witchcraft Through The Ages is
    >> the only version of the movie that fans under the age of ninety are
    >> really familiar with (I know I prefer it).

    >
    > Err, Witchcraft Through The Ages is just the shortened (about half an
    > hour), narrated version of the original film.



    No action was cut, just the dull and overlong introduction, which is
    narration accompanied by a lot of medieval illustrations. They were wise
    to cut it. The speed-correction is where most of the missing time went.


    No movie fan would care
    > about it if the choice was between that and the original, though they
    > appreciate having them both - just as Criterion made their DVD.



    Bet they took a bath on it, though. I could hardly decide what pained me
    more, the idea of spending $40 for it, or the thought of not having it on
    DVD at all. I just sat through it tonight, and I have to admit that the
    origianl, tinted version is kind of interesting, particualarly the
    commentary. But then other companies are generally expected to provide
    commentary at half Criterion's price.

    I appreciate the hard work Criterion does on their transfers, but I think
    their extras are standard to syrofoam, I deeply suspect their doubling-up
    of versions of a film, and I pity the film connoiseurs, such as myself,
    who have to work half a day to buy a title that could have been produced
    by a company like Image with an adequate transfer, for half the price.

    I just think that Criterion's market strategy is curious, and at times
    rather obviously dubious.


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Nov 5, 2003
    #8
  9. Jesse Edwards

    ML-78 Guest

    > Oh? The Murnau version, or the Svankmajer version?

    Spanish company Divisa Red released the definitive version of Murnau's film so
    far. There's a comparative review here:

    http://207.136.67.23/film/dvdcompare/faust.htm

    It has original German intertitles (good thing), but unfortunately no English
    subtitles. Transit will release it later on and I guess they'll include English
    subtitles, and region 1 releases will probably follow at some point too.

    > Fine, as long as there is another version out there to compare it to.
    > Criterion announced years ago that they were going to release Equinox,
    > which doesn't exist on DVD. That never panned out, I guess, but what
    > would be the point in doing a pain-staking transfer of a 1960's shlock
    > film that would only reveal all of the flaws?


    That's exactly what the DVD media is about. Being a horror fan myself, I want
    pristine copies of even the most obscure titles. I don't want cut and dubbed
    versions of my films either - same thing.

    > And how about the transfer for The
    > Seven Samarai? Not too good, as I understand it.


    The transfer is not bad, even though better ones have been made since. And
    Criterion (who else) might release that at some point.

    > Extras? Nada! Or
    > have I been misinformed?


    Apparently. It has a commentary track which is quite good.

    > Well, I happen to be a true movie fan, and that disc isn't worth $35.


    Carnival of Souls is available in several, cheaper versions. I gladly paid for
    the Criterion one, avoiding those other low(er) quality releases. Why would I
    want them taking up space on my shelf when there's a much better one around?

    > You think if they had only included the Director's cut, and priced
    > it reasonably, that anyone would have really minded beyond the most
    > pathological geeks in need of intense psychotherapy?


    That's exactly who Criterion appeal to.


    ML-78
     
    ML-78, Nov 5, 2003
    #9
  10. Jesse Edwards

    Murder Guest

    "ML-78" <> wrote in
    news:boan29$1mts$:


    >
    >> You think if they had only included the Director's cut, and priced
    >> it reasonably, that anyone would have really minded beyond the most
    >> pathological geeks in need of intense psychotherapy?

    >
    > That's exactly who Criterion appeal to.



    As long as I can find a cheap alternative to titles that I don't want to
    spend forty bucks on, I won't complain. I wouldn't spend more than $15
    on The Blob (for example), I don't care what extras are included. As far
    as I know, the Criterion version is the only one.


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Nov 5, 2003
    #10
  11. Jesse Edwards

    Richard C. Guest

    Re: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r

    "Jesse Edwards" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : Does anyone have the Criterion Version of RoboCop that I could get a
    : DVD-r copy of cheap? I want all the extras, menus, etc.. with it
    :
    ==============
    Sure.....just forward the $250,000 to cover all the fines and penalties and one will
    be sent to you right away.
    ==============
     
    Richard C., Nov 5, 2003
    #11
  12. Jesse Edwards

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    Murder wrote:
    >
    > As long as I can find a cheap alternative to titles that I don't want to
    > spend forty bucks on, I won't complain. I wouldn't spend more than $15
    > on The Blob (for example), I don't care what extras are included. As far
    > as I know, the Criterion version is the only one.
    >


    Your analysis is disingenious. You're comparing Criterion sticker
    prices with sale prices of other titles. For example I got The Blob for
    26 dollars from buy.com including shipping. Granted it's more than the
    15 dollars that you are willing to spend, but IMHO it was worth that
    price to me.

    YMMV

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Nov 5, 2003
    #12
  13. Jesse Edwards

    Evil Guest

    Re: Criterion (was Re: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r) (was: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r)

    Douglas Bailey <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Murder wrote:
    > > But that's Criterion's problem- they charge twice as much as the market
    > > for movies that can scarcely be called Special Editions. The Criterion
    > > Robocop has no features on it that are worth a second look.

    >
    > Well, except for the director's cut of the film, which I've found to be
    > worth a third or fourth look, easily. :)
    >
    > (More on this below.)
    >
    >
    > > At one time it could be explained that they released obscure movies that
    > > no one else would bother with, but no more. Every week there are fairly
    > > obscure movies that get SE releases that far exceed Criterion in quality
    > > extras for $15-20.

    >
    > Here's last week's release list, as posted in rec.video.dvd.titles:
    >
    > <http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vpuu0g81bsnra6%40corp.supernews.com>
    >
    > Please feel free to point out the obscure $15-20 SE releases that surpass
    > Criterion's editions.
    >
    > And the "obscure movies" thing still holds true: with or without extras, I
    > haven't seen any other companies in a big hurry to release _Schizopolis_,
    > just to pick a title off the top of my head. Or _The Passion of Joan of
    > Arc_.
    >
    > In most of the cases where a film has been released by Criterion and
    > another company, whether in parallel (_Arma- *euch* -geddon_, _Fear and
    > Loathing in Las Vegas_) or in succession (_RoboCop_, _Sid & Nancy_), I've
    > found the Criterion editions to be either equivalent or superior to their
    > major-label counterparts, albeit sometimes on different grounds.
    >
    > Let's look at _RoboCop_, your test case. There's the Criterion disc, the
    > MGM disc...and the old (OOP) Image disc, which I think we can safely say
    > isn't really in the running quality-wise.
    >
    > The MGM disc has a newer transfer and it's 16:9-enhanced. It also has a
    > 5.1-channel remix. And it lists for $20. That's nothing to sneer at. (I own
    > this disc, so I'm not just saying this out of politeness.)
    >
    > But MGM's disc doesn't have the director's cut of the film, or his
    > preferred 1.66:1 framing, or the commentary track, or the original stereo
    > soundtrack. And those are things that I think are worth having.
    >
    > It's quite true that the Criterion disc costs more: back when it was in
    > print, it listed for $40 (I'm sure it's more now on eBay). But I don't
    > regret having bought it.
    >
    >
    > > I say that it's time for Criterion to get in another line of
    > > bussiness, or try competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etcetera.

    >
    > They *are* competing with Image, Anchor Bay, etc. And apparently they're
    > doing okay in that competition: if they weren't, I'd expect to have seen
    > some changes in their approach. Instead, they're releasing pretty much the
    > same mix of obscurities and foreign films (and a few mainstream flix) that
    > they've been doing since they moved into DVD.
    >
    > "Competing with" doesn't necessarily mean "doing the same thing as."
    >
    > doug


    i agree with you about Criterion. Love that the movies i REALLY WANT
    are available in these excellent dvds. I just wish they'd go back and
    make some of their earlier titles ANAMORPHIC. I'm holding off on
    YOJIMBO and SANJURO for that exact reason.

    the price of Criterions is pretty steep, but dvdpacific gives near 40%
    off, so under $30 gets less steep.
     
    Evil, Nov 5, 2003
    #13
  14. Jesse Edwards

    jayembee Guest

    Murder <> wrote:

    > jayembee <> wrote:
    >
    >> Murder <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Every week there are fairly obscure movies that get SE
    >>> releases that far exceed Criterion in quality extras
    >>> for $15-20.

    >>
    >> Name them.

    >
    > Well, I said they come out every week. It would be pretty
    > silly to "name them" for your benefit, wouldn't it?


    Well, you present four criteria, and claim (or at least
    strongly suggest) that every week there are releases that
    fill all four: (1) obscurity, (2) special editions, (3)
    exceed (not match, but exceed) Criterion in quality extras,
    and (4) priced at $15-20.

    I've come across damn few releases that fit all of these
    criteria, or even three out of the four. And not very many
    that fit two out of the four, either.

    > How about Kino's versions of Faust?
    > How about Kino's version of *anything*?


    How about them? While Kino is certainly up there in terms
    of releasing non-mainstream films, and doing a damn fine
    job of it, very few of them have extras worth a damn (the
    recent release of METROPOLIS is a notable exception), and
    most Kino titles are priced at $30 or more.

    Specifically, let's look at FAUST. I'm not sure if you mean
    the Svankmajer film or the Murnau, but let's look at both:

    Svankmajer's FAUST:

    (1) Obscure? Arguably.
    (2) Special Edition? No.
    (3) Extras that exceed Criterion? There are no extras at all.
    (4) Priced between $15 and $20? MSRP is $29.95.

    Murnau's FAUST:

    (1) Obscure? Arguably.
    (2) Special Edition? Possibly.
    (3) Extras? [cut-&-pasted from Kino's website] "UFA Studios
    1925: The Making Of Faust" (A gallery of rare production
    stills) and Essay by film historian Jan Christopher Horak.
    (4) Priced between $15 and $20? MSRP is $29.95.

    You can't seriously tell me that either of those is notably
    superior to Criterion's releases, either in features or
    price. (And don't use the old "Who pays MSRP?" argument.
    Wherever you can get Kinos at a discount, you can get
    Criterions at the same discount.)

    Kino is a damn fine label. I have an extensive set of their
    releases myself. But if they did every one of the titles
    that Criterion has, they would cost just about as much as
    the Criterions do, and wouldn't look nearly as good, either
    in terms of the sources, the transfer, or the extras.

    > How about Blue Underground?


    I have one Blue Underground release: the Christopher Lee
    Collection. I'm not overly impressed. The source material
    is good, but not great. The extras aren't anything to write
    home about. Most of them are deleted scenes that were deleted
    for good reason. The interviews are interesting, true, but
    to say that they are better than what appears on Criterion's
    releases is...well, I want to say "absurd", but it's the sort
    of thing that depends on what interests the individual viewer.

    The only thing that makes this set superior to Criterion's
    releases is the price: $59.96 MSRP, or $15 per film.

    > Retromedia? Image? All specialize in obscure titles, all
    > priced $15-20 dollars, with extras (except Retromedia titles
    > which generally have no extras, but are priced $10 or less).


    Retromedia is priced $10 or less? So are Laserlight, and the
    other Public Domain labels. But their output is crap.

    I haven't sampled any of Retromedia's titles. Obscure, yes.
    Cheap, yes. But I have a hard time believing that they are
    qualitatively as good as Criterion's. Suggest a couple of
    titles you think are.

    Image? Image varies, depending on the client company (Image
    is an outsourcing company for smaller video companies).
    Titles released by Image from folks like All-Day, Blackhawk,
    Milestone, and Ruscico (to name some with relatively obscure
    titles) are often priced at $29.95, and contain few, if any,
    extras.

    > I hate it when I hear about a title I covet being snatched
    > up by Criterion. That means it will be grossly overpriced
    > and come with extras that. typically, are utterly worthless
    > (Fear And Loathing appears to have some nice extras, but I
    > can live with the Universal Edition that I got for 1/4 the
    > price of the Criterion). Other companies produce actual
    > featurettes and documenteries. Criterion gives you stuff
    > that was available, but that no one else would think of
    > wasting disc-space on.


    That's utter nonsense. A damn lot of Criterion's extras are
    produced and owned by Criterion. But even when they aren't,
    they are things that certainly interest *me*, and undoubtedly
    interest a lot of other people. The fact that they don't
    interest you is more about you than it is about Criterion.

    > Their Carnival Of Souls has two different versions of the
    > movie on two discs, with a difference of about four minutes
    > of scattered, insignificant footage between them. They put
    > two versions on the release just to justify jacking the
    > price way up.


    No, they didn't. They put both of them on because they believed
    that the hardcore fans of the film would *want* both versions.

    > They basically did the same thing with Haxan, throwing in
    > Witchcraft Through The Ages in as the alternate version.
    > The trouble is, Witchcraft Through The Ages is the only
    > version of the movie that fans under the age of ninety are
    > really familiar with (I know I prefer it).


    So let me get this straight. HAXAN is an all-but-lost classic
    of the genre, and hasn't been seen in its original, unadulterated
    form in well over 50 years, but including it along with the
    more familiar, adulterated version is somehow a *bad* thing?

    Most horror fans *I* know danced the Dance of Joy at finally
    being able to watch the film as it was originally released,
    and here you are complaining about its inclusion.

    If you prefer the adulterated version, good for you. But I
    can't believe that you can't see the value in releasing the
    original version.

    > As for Robocop, the "excessively violent" extra footage
    > only ads up to a few moments, as far as I can tell.


    The amount of footage added is irrelevant. Even one short
    scene can alter an entire film. The most obvious example
    is the unicorn dream sequence in BLADE RUNNER

    > Aside from the commentary (which other companies also
    > deliver, remember, at half the price)


    Not this specific commentary, they don't.

    > the extras include an essay that could have just as easily
    > been put in the insert (who wants to read an essay on the
    > teevee screen?), some storyboards (Ooooo! Boy, that makes
    > it worth $35!), trailers (found on all but the shoddiest,
    > bargain-bin DVD releases), and, um, it's dual-layer (and
    > what isn't, nowadays?).


    It also presents the film in Verhoeven's preferred ratio of
    1.66:1, as opposed to the (from this perspective) overmatted
    1.85:1 ratio of both the Image/Orion and MGM releases.

    > That's why no one will buy the damn thing- because their
    > databases tell them it's way over-valued, and won't sell
    > any better than the junk version.


    To the average DVD buyer, no. But to a collector, it certainly
    would.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Nov 5, 2003
    #14
  15. Re: Criterion (was Re: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r)

    Evil wrote:
    > I just wish they'd go back and make some of their earlier titles
    > ANAMORPHIC. I'm holding off on YOJIMBO and SANJURO for that exact
    > reason.


    Even as an owner of the non-16:9 DVDs (they're still better than my
    laserdiscs), I would love to see Criterion re-issue these two films in
    16:9-enhanced editions.

    There *are* rumours that they're going to release a new DVD version of
    _Seven Samurai_, based on the new-and-improved prints (with more accurate
    subtitling) that've been making the rounds of the US recently. If that's
    true, maybe they'll also eventually be able to release new discs of
    _Yojimbo_ and _Sanjuro_, which are also Toho films.

    _Ikiru_ is coming in January, though, and in the short term I'd rather they
    work on that than on re-issues of their older titles. (And I'm also hoping
    that another Criterion/Kurosawa rumour -- viz., that Fox is going to
    license _Kagemusha_ to Criterion for DVD release -- is true, too.)

    doug

    --

    ---------------Douglas Bailey ()---------------
    Everything is good these days, but all of my friends are dying...
    --Magnapop
     
    Douglas Bailey, Nov 5, 2003
    #15
  16. Jesse Edwards

    Wade365 Guest

    Re: Criterion (was Re: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r)

    I wish I had bought a copy of the Criterion RoboCop. Any little bit put back
    into that on the violence end (and if you read imdb, there's more than just "a
    bit" restored violent or otherwise; I was amazed at the difference in versions
    out there) and any time you can get the director's preferred aspect ration (see
    imdb about that, too) I'd say it's a good thing.

    Here's hoping that they put out anamorphic discs of the samurai classics too...
    been holding off on "Yojimbo" and "Sanjuro" for that reason m'self.

    GREAT movies, full of real humor and style.
     
    Wade365, Nov 6, 2003
    #16
  17. Re: Criterion (was Re: wtd: RoboCop Criterion DVD-r)

    > I wish I had bought a copy of the Criterion RoboCop. Any little bit
    > put back into that on the violence end (and if you read imdb, there's
    > more than just "a bit" restored violent or otherwise; I was amazed at
    > the difference in versions out there) and any time you can get the
    > director's preferred aspect ration (see imdb about that, too) I'd say
    > it's a good thing.


    The extra violence is a very odd thing. I first saw the R-Rated version
    of the film, which was supposedly tamer. In it, the violence went by so
    fast I felt a bit shell-shocked. It was one of the few times a movie
    almost made my heart stop. When I saw the "X-Rated" cut, I fully expected
    to be blown away by even more violence. Instead, it had the effect of
    desensitizing me to it-- which I think was the filmmakers' intent to begin
    with.

    Adding more blood ended up making the film easier to watch. It just
    goes to show how you can't quantify fear or offensiveness.

    --

    Aaron J. Bossig

    http://www.GodsLabRat.com
    http://www.daily-reviews.com
     
    Aaron J. Bossig, Nov 6, 2003
    #17
  18. Jesse Edwards

    Murder Guest

    (jayembee) wrote in
    news::


    > To the average DVD buyer, no. But to a collector, it certainly
    > would.



    Okay, you make a good case. I was just griping, I guess. Interesting to
    see that so many here are so fiercly defensive of Criterion (I'm not
    saying that's a bad thing). I still feel that I'd rather see other
    companies that are more practical get these titles. I'm not impressed
    with Criterion's extras, by and large, and I'd take movie-only versions,
    with a decent transfer. That's just one thing that seperates me from the
    hardcore aficianados that have money coming out of their ears.


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Nov 6, 2003
    #18
  19. Murder wrote:

    > I'm not impressed
    > with Criterion's extras, by and large, and I'd take movie-only versions,
    > with a decent transfer. That's just one thing that seperates me from the
    > hardcore aficianados that have money coming out of their ears.


    I'm one of the people with money coming ou of some
    place, but I'm with you - all the artsy fartsy extras
    beginning with commentaries are worthless compared to
    a decent anamorphic transfer and kick a** sound track.


    Darrel :)
     
    Darrel Christenson, Nov 6, 2003
    #19
  20. Jesse Edwards

    Murder Guest

    Darrel Christenson <> wrote in
    news:wIkqb.86934$275.256344@attbi_s53:

    > Murder wrote:
    >
    >> I'm not impressed
    >> with Criterion's extras, by and large, and I'd take movie-only
    >> versions, with a decent transfer. That's just one thing that
    >> seperates me from the hardcore aficianados that have money coming out
    >> of their ears.

    >
    > I'm one of the people with money coming ou of some
    > place, but I'm with you - all the artsy fartsy extras
    > beginning with commentaries are worthless compared to
    > a decent anamorphic transfer and kick a** sound track.
    >
    >
    > Darrel :)
    >
    >



    I appreciate a good commentary, but Criterion isn't exactly ahead of the
    pack on that. Also, I don't have a WS teevee to get much out of
    anamorphic, and I don't want to piss off my neighbors with my sound
    cranked up to enjoy that THX system (which I also lack). Criterion's
    extras strike me more as irrelevent. If they'd produce featurettes
    (where applicable), even brief ones, I'd be a little more enamored of
    them. But they find whatever junk is laying around, and put that on to
    help justify the price. They do excellent transfers, usually, but good
    transfers aren't the novelty that they used to be, either.


    The Castle Monster: http://www.processionofthedamned.com/diablo.htm
     
    Murder, Nov 6, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Wade365
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    479
    Wade365
    Oct 26, 2003
  2. Inflamedbrain

    FA: ROBOCOP Criterion DVD & Sequels

    Inflamedbrain, Feb 27, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    464
    Inflamedbrain
    Feb 27, 2004
  3. Chris@DVDDebate
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    757
  4. Michael Allred

    FS: "Robocop" Criterion Collection DVD

    Michael Allred, Aug 6, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    846
  5. J Rusnak
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    640
    J Rusnak
    Jan 2, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page