Criterion Blu-ray

[Tribe]

Poor Criterion... trapped in the middle of mergers and aquisitions and being sucked into an international 'indie' conglomerate.

I think you're reading way too much into the legalese. The language about defaults and waivers is stuff that must be disclosed because of SEC regs and the like...it doesn't mean that there is necessarily any danger that those results will happen or that there is necessarily any danger that they are likely to happen. Pretty much every default on a debt causes the debt to become due and payable immediately...its pretty much boilerplate stuff in a contract, by the same token just about whenever there is a default waivers have to be obtained because there is never enough money to pay the debt and pay everyday expenses as they come due.

The point being that I don't interpret the clauses you've cited from as reason to believe that Image is any trouble financially. They could be...but not necessarily because of the things you've cited.

Tribe

[jedgeco]

Of course, Monsieur The, you forget to mention something:

Criterion laserdiscs were obscenely expensive because it was the only way to turn a profit in that smaller market. The same thing would happen if Criterion jumped to BR: the prices would make your eyes bulge out.

Well, there are already as many Blu-ray players* in service as there were laserdisc players at its peak. And I think everyone realizes that Blu-ray should have more long-term potential than laser did.

(*Including PS3s.)

[arsonfilms]

Laserdiscs had massive long term potential! Jaws came out on Laserdisc in 1978, and Sleepy Hollow was the last one released all the way up in 2000. In Japan, titles were still coming out in 2001! Thats 23 years! Wait, 23 years and it only ever achieved a 2% market penetration? Yeesh.

Of course, bear in mind how much home entertainment has changed since then before you go around comparing business models from the 80s and 90s.

[jedgeco]

Laserdiscs had massive long term potential! Jaws came out on Laserdisc in 1978, and Sleepy Hollow was the last one released all the way up in 2000. In Japan, titles were still coming out in 2001! Thats 23 years! Wait, 23 years and it only ever achieved a 2% market penetration? Yeesh.

Of course, bear in mind how much home entertainment has changed since then before you go around comparing business models from the 80s and 90s.

I think that you're misunderstanding my point. LD was around for 23 years, but never had much commercial viability. Blu-ray already has as many players in homes in 18 months as LD did in 23 years. I think even those who are most bearish on BD/high def media would bet that BD will be more successful than was Laser.

Thus, my initial (albeit unstated) point: there is little reason to believe that a Criterion Blu-ray would hit Laserdisc prices to be commercially viable.

[arsonfilms]

Laserdiscs had massive long term potential! Jaws came out on Laserdisc in 1978, and Sleepy Hollow was the last one released all the way up in 2000. In Japan, titles were still coming out in 2001! Thats 23 years! Wait, 23 years and it only ever achieved a 2% market penetration? Yeesh.

Of course, bear in mind how much home entertainment has changed since then before you go around comparing business models from the 80s and 90s.

I think that you're misunderstanding my point. LD was around for 23 years, but never had much commercial viability. Blu-ray already has as many players in homes in 18 months as LD did in 23 years. I think even those who are most bearish on BD/high def media would bet that BD will be more successful than was Laser.

Thus, my initial (albeit unstated) point: there is little reason to believe that a Criterion Blu-ray would hit Laserdisc prices to be commercially viable.

I understand your point completely. My point though, again, was:

Bear in mind how much home entertainment has changed since then before you go around comparing business models from the 80s and 90s.

Blu-ray is an INCREDIBLY expensive venture. Set up fees and manufacturing prices are astronomical. I've said this dozens of times on this forum, but only the major studios have a vested interest in technology because they've already made an investment in it. This is the only reason prices are as low as they are: studios don't lose money on the venture until it fails. They need the new format, because they're running out of popular catalogue titles that they can re-package in SD. If they can get it to catch on, the can start the whole process of releasing old titles all over again. They want to go back to the 1998 market with a new format and start the original process all over again, because studio release sales are stalling. Indie releases though, are picking up, and those companies don't have anything invested in the new technology.

The reason the market change makes comparisons to the laserdisc years a moot point is that DVD presented a reason for people to buy movies, instead of renting them as the VHS market encouraged. Laserdisc was the alternative for cinephiles, but now cinephiles already have the DVD market, which is enormous. Blu-ray doesn't present a big enough change in the way of consumer thinking to adequately justify the comparison. It looks prettier, sure, but only when you make the picture bigger.

Blu will absolutely be more successful than Laser, but the part of the argument that you're forgetting is how much MORE successful DVD is right now than VHS ever was. Blu's comparative success is driven by the the DVD market. Blu isn't so much filling a gap (as DVD already did that) but is instead presenting another option for roughly the same product. Thats why any talk of Criterion investing in the technology is extremely premature. They don't have the existing investment, and would be operating at a loss anyway until the market picked up. Why bother with that if you can wait and operate at a profit?

[kevyip1]

If Criterion goes Blu, I think we'll have brace ourselves for some laserdisc pricing. Remember non-Criterion laserdiscs usually had a minimum of $40 SRP, which is in line with the Blu-ray pricing right now -- most BDs today have $35-40 SRP. Therefore, prepare yourselves for Criterion BDs with $45-50 SRP minimum, which is what Criterion LD pricing used to be. Prepare to pay $15-20 more for Criterion BDs than what you're paying for Criterion DVDs.

[Lemmy Caution]

I think this thread should be re-titled:

Blue Ray Won ... What's Next?

[ellipsis7]

I think this thread should be re-titled:

Blue Ray Won ... What's Next?

Now someone has to persuade the consumer to convert - there are negligible sales of either HD format discs or machines relative to SDVD, and it will not suit a niche label like Criterion to narrow their market for a long time yet...

Odds on it's a long game being played, and there is a further generation of format upstream that may find mass acceptance...

[jaredsap]

Now someone has to persuade the consumer to convert - there are negligible sales of either HD format discs or machines relative to SDVD, and it will not suit a niche label like Criterion to narrow their market for a long time yet...

Odds on it's a long game being played, and there is a further generation of format upstream that may find mass acceptance...

With all due respect to the countless people on this forum who have perpetuated the (baseless imo) idea that Criterion will not weigh into high-def until it achieves mass acceptance, allow me to quote Turell himself:

...when we have an answer—which will most likely come right after the big guys resolve their format war—we will let you know.

Oh, and in case that was too vague, here's Becker on the issue:

At this point, any solution that would let consumers upgrade with confidence would be a step in the right direction, and as soon as that solution emerges, we'll be there.

[ellipsis7]

Both those quotes are measured if you read them carefully... Certainly they say they will go with the definitive flow, but there's nothing there that says they'll be in the vanguard, or will go with an HD format that isn't proven and widespread... Basically the math goes so - Criterion is a niche label catering to a discriminating minority willing to shell out for high end authored product... Only a small minority of DVD consumers have opted for any HD format... If Criterion went to BluRay now they would automatically exclude most of their market, because they would be aiming for a minority of a minority...

Now they have built in insurance policies - new releases could be in dual format (SD & HD - but would it be economically viable?), and they've been running off HD transfers of the main features for some time, so that part is already looked after...

However would existing customers want to replace their basically fine SD CC releases for marginally better BluRay discs so soon? Remembering that at least 50% of every Criterion package would be unchanged in the commentary track, booklet and extras,vrtually all are SD sourced format...

Turrell and Becker refer to an 'answer' and a 'solution' once the field becomes clear - no guarantee what either will be, they seem wisely to be hedging their bets!... Between the two HD formats, but also whether to go with any of the current generation of HD formats now or in the future...

[jaredsap]

Both those quotes are measured if you read them carefully... Certainly they say they will go with the definitive flow, but there's nothing there that says they'll be in the vanguard, or will go with an HD format that isn't proven and widespread...

I agree the quotes are measured and a guarantee of nothing, but it simply makes no sense for Turell and Becker to sit on the sidelines for awhile (as has come to be the accepted wisdom on this forum) waiting for Blu-ray to achieve much higher market saturation. Criterion has always been in the vanguard, and if they twiddle their thumbs waiting until the Wal-Mart crowd -- who never have a bought a Criterion disc in their life -- all have Blu-ray players, they'll have lost their high-def window to downloading.

However would existing customers want to replace their basically fine SD CC releases for marginally better BluRay discs so soon?

This is irrelevant. The question is how soon will Criterion start releasing SD and Blu-ray editions of new titles simultaneously.

[Matango]

Looks like we'll all be buying Blu-Ray now that HD DVD has bit the dust.

[starmanof51]

Looks like we'll all be buying Blu-Ray now that HD DVD has bit the dust.

I'd have to buy a HDTV first, and that isn't even a hazy thought in my head yet.

[unclehulot]

If Criterion goes Blu, I think we'll have brace ourselves for some laserdisc pricing. Remember non-Criterion laserdiscs usually had a minimum of $40 SRP, which is in line with the Blu-ray pricing right now -- most BDs today have $35-40 SRP. Therefore, prepare yourselves for Criterion BDs with $45-50 SRP minimum, which is what Criterion LD pricing used to be. Prepare to pay $15-20 more for Criterion BDs than what you're paying for Criterion DVDs.

This very well may be the case, but shouldn't Blu-ray prices eventually level off a bit? Is some of the high price right now due to mastering and set-up costs, rather than the actual manufacturing cost (which was part of what kept LD prices high.....the discs never got below something like $8 each, just to manufacture).

[arsonfilms]

If Criterion goes Blu, I think we'll have brace ourselves for some laserdisc pricing. Remember non-Criterion laserdiscs usually had a minimum of $40 SRP, which is in line with the Blu-ray pricing right now -- most BDs today have $35-40 SRP. Therefore, prepare yourselves for Criterion BDs with $45-50 SRP minimum, which is what Criterion LD pricing used to be. Prepare to pay $15-20 more for Criterion BDs than what you're paying for Criterion DVDs.

This very well may be the case, but shouldn't Blu-ray prices eventually level off a bit? Is some of the high price right now due to mastering and set-up costs, rather than the actual manufacturing cost (which was part of what kept LD prices high.....the discs never got below something like $8 each, just to manufacture).

Mastering and manufacturing is just as expensive, simply because of the cost of the required equipment, which will never go down. The big benefit of HD-DVD is that manufacturing costs would have eventually gone down, because SD DVD manufacturing equipment can easily be adapted to handle HD. Blu Ray requires brand new machines and facilities in addition to the licensing and set-up. Any manufacturer who decides to take on Blu Ray will have tremendous ongoing costs, and will pass them along to the label or studio, who will in turn pass them on to the customer. It could have eventually been different with HD DVD, but that wasn't the way the market went.

[kevyip1]

With the large capacity of Blu-ray, we would probably only see single-disc Criterion releases, thus keeping the SRP within $50-60 per title, which would still be tolerable. This would be unlike LD pricing, which could explode to $100+ due to the need of multiple discs.

[miless]

With the large capacity of Blu-ray, we would probably only see single-disc Criterion releases, thus keeping the SRP within $50-60 per title, which would still be tolerable. This would be unlike LD pricing, which could explode to $100+ due to the need of multiple discs.

I doubt Berlin Alexanderplatz would fit (in HD) on one Blu disc.

[arsonfilms]

Also bear in mind that despite the space available on a blu-ray disc, HD video takes up a lot of space. SD special features could be squeezed onto anything, but HD special features could not. Think about what a blu-ray Moral Tales, Brazil, Arkadin or Leopard would cost.

[Gigi M.]

Also bear in mind that despite the space available on a blu-ray disc, HD video takes up a lot of space. SD special features could be squeezed onto anything, but HD special features could not. Think about what a blu-ray Moral Tales, Brazil, Arkadin or Leopard would cost.

If I was Becker over at Criterion, and was about to release the first Blu Ray, The Leopard would be my first choice. Without question one of the few films I could think I would love to see on Blu.

To bad is Fox property.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

I would expect their first title to be Seven Samurai, a proven seller which has appeal outside of the usual cinephile circles. It would probably be region A even though Japan and the US are in the same region for BD. Actually, that might count against this being the first Criterion BD as it might cut into potential sales in Japan.

[mteller]

I think the best strategy would be something that's due for a re-release anyway. For instance, Salo. Or for the love of God, Picnic at Hanging Rock.

[Gigi M.]

Alternatively how about Le Samourai? For which there is a tantalizing and gorgeous five second grab in the Studio Canal HD Mulholland Dr opening trailer reel.

Ahhh!!! Pure cinema. I totally forgot about that one. Can you image the opening credit sequence with a perfect touch of HD grain? Priceless.

[Gigi M.]

More seriously I am not sure that Picnic has ever been mastered in HD datacine.

David, the other day I was reading that Warner is going back and redo all their progressive transfer because they're not good enough for Blu Ray 1080p? Why is that? So, if Warner's going back, is Criterion also on the same boat?

[denti alligator]

The Criterion title that really, really needs an HD release (more than just about any other) is Playtime. The remastered version is fine, but SD just doesn't do the detail justice. Please, Criterion, please!!

[kevyip1]

With the large capacity of Blu-ray, we would probably only see single-disc Criterion releases, thus keeping the SRP within $50-60 per title, which would still be tolerable. This would be unlike LD pricing, which could explode to $100+ due to the need of multiple discs.

I doubt Berlin Alexanderplatz would fit (in HD) on one Blu disc.

You're talking about a title that is an exception to the norm. A TYPICAL release, which comprises of a two-hour-or-so movie plus a fair amount of extras, can fit on to one dual-layer BD, with the movie in HD and extras in SD, like many of the BD releases we see today. In laserdisc days, they often couldn't fit a movie on 2, even 3, discs.