The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

News on Criterion and Janus Films.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#276 Post by dwk » Sat Nov 16, 2013 1:34 am

ianungstad wrote:Not happening. I asked James Finn on twitter and he stated flat out that Fox would be releasing a new edition of TGTBTU and not Criterion. It was certainly some bored office drone trying to toy with fans.
I'm aware of Finn's response to your tweet, and, assuming Finn was telling you the truth, I'd still like to hear Criterion comment on the issue because posting fake info like that is a pretty dick move.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#277 Post by Gregory » Sat Nov 16, 2013 1:38 am

Ask them if they think it's the work of a mole, or a spy, or a mole who wants them to think it's the work of a spy.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#278 Post by FrauBlucher » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:16 pm

Anyone care to speculate on which Bill Condon title could possibly be heading to a CC release.

User avatar
ptatler
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:08 pm
Contact:

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#279 Post by ptatler » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:33 pm

FrauBlucher wrote:Anyone care to speculate on which Bill Condon title could possibly be heading to a CC release.
Any answer to that question is a grim one.

User avatar
The Narrator Returns
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#280 Post by The Narrator Returns » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:36 pm

There's no way it's anything besides Gods and Monsters. Unless Peter Becker is a big Twilight fan.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#281 Post by FrauBlucher » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:41 pm

Gods and Monsters would be great.. But maybe Sister, Sister could be in the running. It was an Image dvd release.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#282 Post by domino harvey » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:43 pm

Sister Sister has already been rereleased, plus while I like it a lot I can't imagine it making Criterion's radar

User avatar
willoneill
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#283 Post by willoneill » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:46 pm

You're all dumbfaces. It's obviously Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh.

User avatar
ptatler
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:08 pm
Contact:

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#284 Post by ptatler » Sun Nov 17, 2013 1:57 pm

willoneill wrote:It's obviously Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh.
That would be better than dull Oscar-bation like GODS & MONSTERS.

User avatar
willoneill
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#285 Post by willoneill » Sun Nov 17, 2013 2:30 pm

I haven't see Gods & Monsters yet; I thought it was supposed to be strong. However, what about Kinsey?

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#286 Post by zedz » Sun Nov 17, 2013 4:00 pm

dwk wrote:
ianungstad wrote:Not happening. I asked James Finn on twitter and he stated flat out that Fox would be releasing a new edition of TGTBTU and not Criterion. It was certainly some bored office drone trying to toy with fans.
I'm aware of Finn's response to your tweet, and, assuming Finn was telling you the truth, I'd still like to hear Criterion comment on the issue because posting fake info like that is a pretty dick move.
On the contrary, I think people who analyze Criterion's tea leaves that obsessively are just begging to be toyed with like this.

I mean, if I were Bob Dylan, I'd be spiking my trash with all sorts of bewildering stuff for A.J. Weberman's benefit.

And anyway, what "fake info" was ever posted?

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#287 Post by dwk » Sun Nov 17, 2013 4:35 pm

zedz wrote:
dwk wrote:
ianungstad wrote:Not happening. I asked James Finn on twitter and he stated flat out that Fox would be releasing a new edition of TGTBTU and not Criterion. It was certainly some bored office drone trying to toy with fans.
I'm aware of Finn's response to your tweet, and, assuming Finn was telling you the truth, I'd still like to hear Criterion comment on the issue because posting fake info like that is a pretty dick move.
On the contrary, I think people who analyze Criterion's tea leaves that obsessively are just begging to be toyed with like this.

I mean, if I were Bob Dylan, I'd be spiking my trash with all sorts of bewildering stuff for A.J. Weberman's benefit.

And anyway, what "fake info" was ever posted?
I was referencing the "People" pages for the cast and crew of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and I don't think that noticing that they have pages up for the cast and crew of a specific film is analyzing tea leaves.

I do think putting up People pages for cast and crew of films they don't have the rights to and are never going to release is incredibly dumb as it has the potential of pissing off a licensor and damaging current or future deals.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#288 Post by swo17 » Sun Nov 17, 2013 5:16 pm

dwk wrote:People pages
Secret empty people pages only noticed by insatiable clue scavengers.

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#289 Post by dwk » Sun Nov 17, 2013 6:57 pm

I don't know if it can be considered a secret if it is accessible by typing a name in the site's own search bar

John Doe
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:41 am

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#290 Post by John Doe » Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:36 pm

swo17 wrote:
dwk wrote:People pages
Secret empty people pages only noticed by insatiable clue scavengers.
So true. The joke is on them.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#291 Post by swo17 » Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:38 pm

dwk wrote:I don't know if it can be considered a secret if it is accessible by typing a name in the site's own search bar
And I'm sure that's one of the first things licensors check before ever putting ink to a contract.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#292 Post by zedz » Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:11 pm

So how is it "fake info" for Criterion's website to have "Sergio Leone," say, as a searchable name on their website? Why can't they populate their website with the names of filmmakers they hope to one day include in their collection? If you embarrass yourself by making the massive and unwarranted leap of logic that the mere presence of a given name in their database equals Criterion officially announcing a film they don't currently hold the rights to, that's your problem, not theirs. Frankly, I find it hilarious that so many people get their noses way out of joint because Criterion doesn't lock step with their own wild speculation. If you can't handle that kind of hard landing, don't leap to conclusions in the first place!

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#293 Post by captveg » Sun Nov 17, 2013 11:37 pm

zedz wrote:If you can't handle that kind of hard landing, don't leap to conclusions in the first place!
It's like landing on "Accept It"

Image

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#294 Post by dwk » Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:33 am

swo17 wrote:And I'm sure that's one of the first things licensors check before ever putting ink to a contract.
You are right, it is not like Criterion has ever had a deal die on the vine because word got out that they were negotiating for a film.
zedz wrote:So how is it "fake info" for Criterion's website to have "Sergio Leone," say, as a searchable name on their website? Why can't they populate their website with the names of filmmakers they hope to one day include in their collection? If you embarrass yourself by making the massive and unwarranted leap of logic that the mere presence of a given name in their database equals Criterion officially announcing a film they don't currently hold the rights to, that's your problem, not theirs. Frankly, I find it hilarious that so many people get their noses way out of joint because Criterion doesn't lock step with their own wild speculation. If you can't handle that kind of hard landing, don't leap to conclusions in the first place!
They can include whatever they want on their site.

Given that the people pages on their site correspond to the titles they've released or to titles they are known to have licensed, I fail to see how it is a massive leap to conclude that when they add the cast and crew of something that means they've got the title.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#295 Post by swo17 » Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:21 am

Given that all fruit are pineapples, I conclude that when I am given a fruit it will be a pineapple.

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#296 Post by dwk » Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:40 am

swo17 wrote:Given that all fruit are pineapples, I conclude that when I am given a fruit it will be a pineapple.
Hey, I didn't say it wasn't a leap, just that it wasn't a massive leap.
zedz wrote: Why can't they populate their website with the names of filmmakers they hope to one day include in their collection?
From an interview with Peter Becker:
Becker: We don't really comment on them. Because as soon we say, "Oh, yeah that sounds great" or "I'm really interested, we're actually pursuing that" or "We're looking at that or we're working on that", then that information would make its way through all of the usenet groups, bulletin boards and all that stuff. Two bad things can end up happening. One, is that we have four new competitors in the marketplace, who weren't looking for it until they were reading the boards and saw this excitement over the fact that Criterion was trying the land the rights. The other problem -- which is even worse -- is that very quickly it would go from "Oh, thanks for that great suggestion, we're actually looking into those rights" or "We're in negotiations for those rights now" to "Criterion has it scheduled" or "Criterion has it coming out next month" or even still, "I went to pre-order it my store, and my store doesn't know anything about it." After that, 48 letters go to Jon Mulvaney, me and to our sales staff saying, "Where is this title? Why do you keep announcing this vaporwear?" That's the fundamental reason that we no longer comment on title suggestions. As much as we love to receive them, and tell people to keep sending them (as helpful as they are), it very quickly feeds a rumor mill that is already willing to believe that we're working on things that we may not be working on. And that just causes disappointment in the customer base.

The biggest disappointment for all of us right now is Eraserhead, which is a title that we never announced. We were in year-long conversations with David Lynch. And it's one of these things where David Lynch is a very particular person. He has very peculiar ideas about how he wants to do things. And he doesn't want to be rushed to make up his mind. And he wants to do what he wants to do, in the way that he wants to do it. He doesn't want his privacy infringed, and he doesn't want to be reading about himself. We were in very protective conversations with him about Eraserhead that were all positive, over a long period of time. Suddenly, there's a rumor on the web that we were actually doing it, and had announced it. At some point, I even saw street dates posted for it. You know, this is something that never even made it on to our actual production load. It had been, at one point, penciled into a schedule -- if we could finish up negotiations in time. But that's as close as it ever come. We had certainly never announced anything about it. That's upsetting.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: The Mystery of the Phantom Web Pages

#297 Post by movielocke » Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:00 am

I thought Gods and Monsters was a sequel to Twilight?

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#298 Post by zedz » Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:03 pm

So Criterion is responsible for any crazy rumour that over-anxious fanboys promulgate? Right. Got it.

Well, in that case I hope the Wexner Q&A is preoccupied with getting to the bottom of this gross abuse of privilege, and I hope there's also a witch hunt to find out who was behind the unconscionable delay between the picture clue for It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, Meh World and its actual announcement! Those guys at HTF were SURE it was coming out a month earlier, so where does Criterion get off deliberately withholding it from them, huh? Why, the smelling salts bill alone!

MongooseCmr
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:50 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#299 Post by MongooseCmr » Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:53 pm

How did this go from "whats up with the misleading cast pages" to this^

User avatar
Moe Dickstein
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol.

#300 Post by Moe Dickstein » Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:27 pm

Also take into account that interview is 14 years old.

Post Reply