Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Sep 21, 2022 - 12:51 PM   
 By:   LordDalek   (Member)

Well, "Amadeus" is rumored to be issued early in 2023 from Criterion

That's actually owned by Saul Zaentz's estate, not Warner.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 21, 2022 - 12:55 PM   
 By:   Spymaster   (Member)

I can't imagine WB licencing Superman to another company. Not in a million years.

Besides which, Criterion ain't all that these days...

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 21, 2022 - 3:13 PM   
 By:   TacktheCobbler   (Member)

I can't imagine WB licencing Superman to another company. Not in a million years.

Besides which, Criterion ain't all that these days...


Agreed. Expanding on that, I can’t see any of Warner’s DC films being licensed elsewhere anytime soon. Then again, I had the same thought about Disney and their animated films, but then Criterion announced Wall-E earlier this month. That being said, I still think it’s a long shot in regards to a Criterion Superman.

 
 Posted:   Sep 21, 2022 - 4:12 PM   
 By:   nuts_score   (Member)

Doubt SUPERMAN will ever be picked up by Criterion. It's not their type of movie. True, they do have some Hollywood action blockbusters in their catalogue, like THE ROCK, but in that case we're talking about an action auteur. Richard Donner was more of a journeyman. A very capable one, but not one that will ignite the cineastes at Criterion, I'm afraid.

I disagree entirely with this sentiment. Criterion has been giving genre fare incredible treatment lately. We still act as though they are some kind of precious entity that designates superiority to motion pictures but they are just another home video release boutique label. They release films by directors from all spectrums of "class."

 
 Posted:   Sep 21, 2022 - 7:57 PM   
 By:   MutualRevolver   (Member)

Criterion editions of STAND AND DELIVER, THE SAINT OF FORT WASHINGTON, and Peter Weir's FEARLESS would be a dream!

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 12:05 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

I disagree entirely with this sentiment. Criterion has been giving genre fare incredible treatment lately.

See, I'm not talking about genre fare, but how much of an artistic stamp the director holds. Criterion rarely, if ever "pushes out" mainstream genre fare unless there's an auteur of some sort behind it, or a cult position somehow. Richard Donner falls in the same category as directors like Ron Howard and Jon Favreau -- very capable 'journeymen' that make some good movies, but with few identifiable thematic and visual traits throughout their filmography.

It has nothing to do with 'superiority' or 'class', but focus on a particular type of cinema. This has been Criterion's focus since day 1.

 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 1:52 AM   
 By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member)

And indeed, Criterion is a "boutique" label; by their own account, they focus on "restoring" and "distributing" classic historic and contemporary films.

SUPERMAN is a big box office mainstream movie from a huge DC/WB franchise. It's easy for WB to throw out a new SUPERMAN restoration super-douper 4K or whatnot set any time they wish. There is no "need" for Criterion to do it, no need for Criterion to license it from WB, and no need for WB to license it to Criterion. They would compete with themselves, as SUPERMAN has been continually released by WB in various forms.

 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 2:39 PM   
 By:   BornOfAJackal   (Member)

I've got the 4K videodisc from Warners.

There's utterly no need for a "making of"-style release of Superman: The Movie. I'm as big a fan of this movie as there could be, and I have no desire to know any behind-the-scenes particulars.

Let's leave this one alone, shall we?

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 3:09 PM   
 By:   Kevin Costigan   (Member)

If there's anything that needs the Criterion Treatment it's the original Star Wars.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 3:21 PM   
 By:   JThree   (Member)



When you say the Criterion treatment, what exactly do you mean? What extras could be added that haven't already been added over the years? Not meaning to sound sarcastic, but what else is there?


--jthree

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 3:21 PM   
 By:   JThree   (Member)

What exactly are you hoping for with a Criterion version of Superman?

Good question.

Although I cannot speak for Jim Bowers & Jay Towers (Superman historians and hosts of the CapedWonder Superman Podcast), Bill Williams (another Superman historian), and Mike Matessino (all of whom I know really well), I can say there is a wealth of material related to SUPERMAN (publicity materials, additional outtakes, and even radio & TV spots and theatrical trailers that have never been released on home video)—some of this material is curated by Bowers himself for his web site, capedwonder.com .

There is also an audio commentary for the 3-hour TV version Bowers and Towers recorded that can be utilized for a potential Criterion edition (and by the way, this commentary is available on the Caped Wonder.com web site).

And of course, an opportunity to utilize an isolated score track for the TV cut (including the dialed-out musical cues).

So there is indeed more material out there that one can hope for in a Criterion edition of SUPERMAN. The next call, of course, is up to the powers that be at Criterion and WB.


OK. There's some good extras there.

---Jthree

 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 5:22 PM   
 By:   nuts_score   (Member)


See, I'm not talking about genre fare, but how much of an artistic stamp the director holds. Criterion rarely, if ever "pushes out" mainstream genre fare unless there's an auteur of some sort behind it, or a cult position somehow. Richard Donner falls in the same category as directors like Ron Howard and Jon Favreau -- very capable 'journeymen' that make some good movies, but with few identifiable thematic and visual traits throughout their filmography.

It has nothing to do with 'superiority' or 'class', but focus on a particular type of cinema. This has been Criterion's focus since day 1.


They just released Devil In a Blue Dress earlier this Summer. Directed by Carl Franklin, arguably one of the great Hollywood journeyman directors of the modern era. The Infernal Affairs trilogy, from great Chinese journeymen Andrew Lau and Alan Mak. And many, many more. A director is a director. They either contribute to a good movie or they don't.

Their mission statement, from their website: "Since 1984, the Criterion Collection has been dedicated to publishing important classic and contemporary films from around the world in editions that offer the highest technical quality and award-winning, original supplements. No matter the medium—from laserdisc to DVD, Blu-ray, 4K Ultra HD to streaming—Criterion has maintained its pioneering commitment to presenting each film as its maker would want it seen, in state-of-the-art restorations with special features designed to encourage repeated watching and deepen the viewer’s appreciation of the art of film."

Criterion specializes in no particular type of cinema, because they celebrate all of cinema.

 
 Posted:   Sep 22, 2022 - 5:25 PM   
 By:   nuts_score   (Member)

And indeed, Criterion is a "boutique" label; by their own account, they focus on "restoring" and "distributing" classic historic and contemporary films.

SUPERMAN is a big box office mainstream movie from a huge DC/WB franchise. It's easy for WB to throw out a new SUPERMAN restoration super-douper 4K or whatnot set any time they wish. There is no "need" for Criterion to do it, no need for Criterion to license it from WB, and no need for WB to license it to Criterion. They would compete with themselves, as SUPERMAN has been continually released by WB in various forms.


I have been concerned recently that the major studios are going to be pulling out of the home video market soon enough. Simultaneous Blu Ray and 4K releases for some titles have become a toss up, and the market is not as successful as it once was in the DVD days. Streamers have won and now all of these studios have their own platforms. So I think it makes all the sense that studios are licensing content out to label boutiques for specialty releases. Criterion announcing Wall•E was the moment that my brain shifted to feel like this is the course we will be on in the coming future.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 1:42 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

I don't know if we're talking past each other or if you're creating your own alternate reality in your head, nuts_score, but again: While it's true that Criterion branches out beyond arthouse cinema or important historical films now and then, the few contemporary, mainstream Hollywood movies that they have in their catalogue of some 1500-ish titles, are either by strong auteurs or have some sort of cult position (THE ROCK, ARMAGEDDON, ROBOCOP, WALL-E, THIS IS SPINAL TAP, TRAFFIC etc.). Donner is no auteur and SUPERMAN is too popular to be a cult film. In fact, I can't think of a single Donner film that would be of interest to them. And that's OK -- there are plenty of other, more mainstream labels that are; that also can offer good production values, and that have.

By the way, SUPERMAN has come a long way in terms of how it's presented -- in fact, one of the very first DVDs I got was a bare-bones, shoddy-looking release from Scanbox, back in the early 2000s. And now there are super-duper Blu-ray releases out there, with every nut and bolt imaginable. And all achieved without the aid of Criterion.

 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 2:36 AM   
 By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member)

I've got the 4K videodisc from Warners.

There's utterly no need for a "making of"-style release of Superman: The Movie. I'm as big a fan of this movie as there could be, and I have no desire to know any behind-the-scenes particulars.

Let's leave this one alone, shall we?



Not sure quite how to understand that comment? I mean "let's leave this one alone"? SUPERMAN has had some of the most "behind-the-scenes" coverage of any movie ever made, even in 1978 when the movie was still made[ there were special behind the scenes coverage in magazines. There are so many "behing-the-scenes" and "making-offs" of Richard Donner's SUPERMAN, including even footage of screen tests by the dentist of the producer's wife. I'm sure there is room for more, but there is already a plethora of background and behind the scenes material on various releases of SUPERMAN.

 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 11:15 AM   
 By:   nuts_score   (Member)

I don't know if we're talking past each other or if you're creating your own alternate reality in your head, nuts_score, but again: While it's true that Criterion branches out beyond arthouse cinema or important historical films now and then, the few contemporary, mainstream Hollywood movies that they have in their catalogue of some 1500-ish titles, are either by strong auteurs or have some sort of cult position (THE ROCK, ARMAGEDDON, ROBOCOP, WALL-E, THIS IS SPINAL TAP, TRAFFIC etc.). Donner is no auteur and SUPERMAN is too popular to be a cult film. In fact, I can't think of a single Donner film that would be of interest to them. And that's OK -- there are plenty of other, more mainstream labels that are; that also can offer good production values, and that have.


I think it has more to do with talking past one another. I think auteur theory is bullshit in general, but Criterion does have about 1200 movies to their release label and I think you'd be surprised to discover just how many are from filmmakers not too different than Donner. Especially when you consider their foreign releases. And then you cite "historical" films as part of the pedigree, which Superman: The Movie, is by many accords. They don't just release and celebrate cult films. And they don't just release "good" films. There are plenty of subjectively bad titles in the catalogue.

As for your inability to think of a single Donner film worthy of a release on their boutique label, I've got a handful I find worthy of a nice treatment here: The Omen, Superman: The Movie, Lethal Weapon, Ladyhawke, and Radio Flyer. All great films and all to be recognized by either a mainstream or a cult audience. Let's celebrate all movies, not just those we can stick our nose into the air to claim we have watched to be superior.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 12:01 PM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

Again with the 'superior' bit. I dont' say that at all; it's a subtext you read all on your own. I love Donner (in fact, I did a whole podcast episode about him and the scores in his movies). He's done some excellent movies. But he would never be on Criterion's radar. There's simply not enough thematic or visual trademarks in his movies to make him interesting for them. It's possible to be an excellent journeyman director, but not necessarily an auteur that catches Criterion's interest.

But I guess we simply have to agree to disagree. Auteur theory exists, and I subscribe to it fully. Moreover, you seem to have made up your mind that Criterion is a label like any other, with no seeming focus or criteria in terms of their selection of titles to release. I don't really know how to respond to that, other than what I've already said in this thread. You really only have to read their catalogue titles.

 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 1:00 PM   
 By:   nuts_score   (Member)

I have about 500 Criterion editions. And I posted their mission statement. A mission statement that would handsomely apply to many great Donner productions! We'll agree to disagree, but I'm still not sure if you do consider Criterion a beacon of preciousness versus a long established company that just wants to sell home video releases to movie lovers. It's all love.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 1:11 PM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

I just think we have a different way of looking at the world, Sean. I love Donner (and his "ilk" of directors like Howard, Favreau or even Eastwood), but I also dig Criterion's very special focus on certain types of film that does not include this ilk. I think there's a 'disconnect' in your mind where you think that labelling someone or something an auteur or cult film automatically means 'superiority' or 'class'. There's no such thing, it's just a focus on a certain type of cinema, neither worse nor better. But I also think it's important to recognize what Criterion is all about, and not just throw it in with any odd mainstream label. The titles in their catalogue speak for themselves.

If there comes a day when Criterion includes a Donner film in their catalogue, I'll gladly eat my words. But I doubt it's ever going to happen.

 
 Posted:   Sep 23, 2022 - 1:28 PM   
 By:   Saul Pincus   (Member)

Auteur theory exists, and I subscribe to it fully.

Now might be the right time to interject that auteur theory, speaking practically, is not a monolith. In practical fact, the auteur vs. "journeyman" argument proceeds from the false assumption that it's binary situation – which it is decidedly not. It's a greyscale, not black and white. Any of one's favourite filmmakers who've made their careers on the basis of publicizing themselves as auteurs (or allowing those to brand them as such) know this privately.

You can't really make the auteur theory stick 100 percent, because to do that, the person who invented and manufactured the motion picture camera would also have to invented and manufactured the film that went into it, not to mention overseeing countless millennia where the minerals that made up those inventions developed.

Hence why we can't argue that Richard Donner – a talented man who didn't journey with a single composer but DID imbue most of his films with a specific heart, point of view, recurring themes, camera and cutting style – wouldn't be admissible to this club.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2022 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.