IFC picked up two projects from the Cannes film market today:

Something in the Air (Oliver Assayas)
Goodbye First Love (Mia Hansen-Love)

The Assayas film is a pre-buy. It doesn't start shooting till June but it sounds interesting.

I hope Criterion is keeping its eyes on Assayas. It has two of his films down now, but Demonlover would be a good fit, too. This upcoming film you speak of seems promising, as well.

I'm hoping that they find a way to get any/all of his pre-Irma Vep work out (L'eau froide, Desordre, etc). This was the only reason I was really excited for the IFC deal (hoping that Criterion would develop a strong enough bond with some of the directors to dig deeper into their back catalogues), but that doesn't seem to have happened yet. Probably a rights issue in many cases, but with any luck there's some earlier Assayas/Koreeda/Desplechin/Troell (the latter may well happen, if Warner has indeed relinquished The Emigrants/The New Land ) in the pipeline.

I forgot that he directed Irma Vep! Actually, that movie could even be given a spine number and be better than over half the titles in the Collection! I mean that in the sense that it's a very good movie, not in the sense that half of the films in the Collection suck. Jean-Pierre Leaud is my favorite actor and he simply needs more representation! (Ugh, Irma Vep's coming out before Out 1... isn't it?)

Irma Vep was released by Zeitgeist in 2008.

Back to business: I just saw Certified Copy yesterday. I couldn't believe it was being played in a theatre near me! I have no clue why it's called "minor" Kiarostami, but after having seen it, I'm bloody pissed that it's being labeled as such! Maybe it's not as good as Close-Up, but I'm pretty sure that it's more popular. I have to say that in this case, Criterion has disappointed me. Hopefully Carlos is announced tomorrow to counter this disappointment.

IFC just picked up Cannes competition entry Sleeping Beauty. Most of the reviews for this film have been quite poor. IFC does have a habit of going after transgressive films with the notion that notoriety will result in profits. I would argue that hasn't really been the case at all. Chances of a Criterion strike me as being very low, IMO.

Actually, this is the type of movie I'd expect Criterion to release. The reviews aren't overwhelmingly negative, which keeps it in play. Also, it's a Jane Campion film, and Criterion released Sweetie a while back. In general, it just seems to have that Criterion feel to it. In this case, it's a mundane indie feel, which Criterion likes at times. (Carlos and Life During Wartime have the good indie feel.) I love Criterion more than most things, but they could very well go for this one, and I agree that that would be a mistake. Thanks for the update. I love keeping track of this IFC partnership!

Speaking of mistakes

Jane Campion isn't involved in this movie at all. She agreed to let the production company use her name to sell the picture. (ex. The Weinstein Company using Quentin Tarantino or Wes Craven to "present" films.)

Sorry, you're right. I thought it said it was a Jane Campion film!

IFC picked up Cannes competition entry House of Tolerance today. It was probably the second most panned film in the main competition next to Sleeping Beauty. This reminds me of Sundance where they seemed to only go after movies that audiences and critics didn't like. (How's that for a business model!)

Not that I know anything, but to the extent this pattern exists (I'll take your word for it), it screams, "WE DON'T HAVE MUCH MONEY FOR ACQUISITIONS!" Or perhaps, "WE WANT TO BE THE NEXT SAMUEL GOLDWYN/ROADSIDE!"

Not that the two are necessarily in contradiction, of course.

It's certainly not a money issue. They've been forking over $1.5 million advances for (supposed) flops like The Ledge and Salvation Boulevard. It seems like they're going after any movie that has Hollywood stars but they can only afford stuff that got terrible reviews and in some cases has been shelved for years. Maybe the folks at IFC think differently but I don't see how that's going to be successful and only cheapens their company's image. You have Magnolia paying $1 million advance for North American rights to Melancholia and you have IFC paying a similar figure for An Invisible Sign. (Jessica Alba is a math genius!)

Maybe they'll pick up some interesting titles by the time Cannes wraps up. Just no more films about women hookers who are beat up by men. Two is more than enough. thx!

So the Goldwyn/Roadside model it is!

Finally something enticing from Cannes. IFC has picked up the rights to The Kid With The Bike by the Dardennes. I can see Criterion being interested in this one...

I definitely hope so. The last two Dardennes films were released by Sony Pictures Classics (L'enfant; Lorna's Silence). This would seem to be Criterion's first chance to do one.

Has there been any word of releasing My Winnipeg, Last Days, or Paranoid Park? I really love this deal with IFC, but it's a "travesty" that Tiny Furniture is being considered before these films that are in desperate need of the Criterion treatment. I'm exaggerating a bit, and don't really have anything against Tiny Furniture; but I really thought that those three in particular would take precedence over something like TF. So, has there been any news on these titles? (I know there hasn't been anything official. This is all assumption.)

The upcoming Carlos release reminded me how pointless the IFC deal is. When I compare releases such as Gomorra, Che, Antichrist, Carlos to their UK counterparts, this is what I see:

• As these are brand new films, they will use the same (official) digital master. Picture and audio quality will be almost identical.
• They share mostly the same special features. Criterion includes some extra stuff, but nothing spectacular. Criterion also includes booklets and has better cover art in most cases.
• Criterions are released months later.
• Criterion releases cost two or three times more.

So basically it's nothing that IFC couldn't do by themselves. Now bring on the Tiny Furniture!

And isn't the Carlos set notably inferior to the UK disc, in terms of lacking the theatrical cut? (Better cover, I'll admit, but it's a hell of a price to pay for it!)

The PQ is better with Criterion's offerings, sure it may not be significant, but it's there, and perhaps noticeable on a projector.

And is the loss of the theatrical cut of Carlos a bad thing? Does Assayas consider it of interest etc? I didn't think this was a similar case to Rivette's shorter cuts, or even the scholarly reasons for including the theatrical cut of Fanny and Alexander or The Leopard.

Sure there may be overlap with UK Blus, but many didn't get Blus here at all - Revanche, Summer Hours, Still Walking etc. And there are still some great IFC titles they could and SHOULD release like Hadewijch and Night + Day, neither of which have a UK release, and i'm guessing the latter won't do any time soon. So the IFC deal is far from pointless; there are small improvements, and it gives films Blu-rays which UK distributors have decided not to.

Revanche isn't an IFC title. Janus owns it outright.

Whoops, apologies! Any way, I'd still prefer more unavailable stuff to IFC titles, (although the Hong and Dumont do fall in that category!)

Indeed, it's a shame they waste their time on the "Standard Release + New 10min Extra + 3-4 Months Wait + Double Price" releases. There are companies out there who do a far better job then them with modern releases, especially when price is bought into the equation: Artifical Eye to name one.

If Criterion can sell significant numbers of these titles (especially to all the squares with region-locked players ) then it's hardly a waste of their time.
As for price, I bought White Material for $16 during a sale at the Criterion store. Importing the R2 Blu-ray would not have saved me anything. Good prices on the Criterions come to those who wait.