 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: Website Discussion |
Page:
1... 9 10 11 12 13 ...21  Previous Next
|
|
Little enhancement |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,414 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Synner:
Image distributes title under the Image banner, they do not distribute The Criterion Collection and haven't going way back to the earliest days of laserdisc. This one can be a little confusing since Criterion is a "subsidiary" of the larger Image, but that's the way it works. I feel your pain, midnit, but it REALLY ius not to understand and comprehend, you do have to have some understanding of the industry and what role DisneyDVD fills versus the DISTRIBUTOR BVHE, but it is not very hard.
Skip Skip, Criterion isn't a subsidiary of Image. Home Vision Entertainment, which was formerly a sister company to Criterion, was sold to Image, and it's probably what you're thinking of. Criterion itself was not sold to Image. However, as part of the HVE deal, Image does distribution for Criterion, which as others have already pointed out, does its own discs and Image is that one that gets them into stores. I know people at both HVE and Criterion, and have several contacts with Image. Trust me on this, Image does the distribution for Criterion, not the other way around. Actually, no need to trust me. Here's the press release about the deal: http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4529338/Image-Entertainment-Acquires-Home-Vision.html I don't know what the situation is between Disney and BVHE, so I'm not commenting on them. But you may now see my point as to why this has the potential for confusion? | | | | "This movie has warped my fragile little mind." | | | | Last edited: by gardibolt |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Correct, gard, However I still don't see the problem to which you refer. There is NO REFERENCE to Image Entertainment on ANY Criterion title that I am aware of. And we don't invent data, so the relationship between Image and Criterion from our view point is not relevant in any form. Unlike Disney (and related) which clearly states on ALL titles, at least until recent ly MAYBE, Distributed by Buena Vista Home Entertainment. There is not even a logo for Image Entertainment on any Criterion Title, therefore no problem relative to Criterion...Image does not exist.
Admittedly Distribution can be a sticky wicket from time to time, but not one I have never been unable to sort out and resolve, including some oddballs like Critic's Choice Video which is related to Deep Discount DVD... so what, they aren't credited. I don't understand why we need to raise problems where no problem really exist.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Correct, gard, However I still don't see the problem to which you refer. There is NO REFERENCE to Image Entertainment on ANY Criterion title that I am aware of. And we don't invent data, so the relationship between Image and Criterion from our view point is not relevant in any form. Unlike Disney (and related) which clearly states on ALL titles, at least until recent ly MAYBE, Distributed by Buena Vista Home Entertainment. There is not even a logo for Image Entertainment on any Criterion Title, therefore no problem relative to Criterion...Image does not exist. But this is why it is being brought up now, to avoid confusion on what "distributor" means for the purpose of profiling. Techinically, Image is the distributor. Common sense says it is Criterion, but we all know that common sense isn't always common around here (sometimes even with the rules!). This discussion is meant to head that off. But, as I said before, the BVHE and Disney DVD (or Miramax, or any other of subsidiary) problems could be erased by simply giving us three fields. This allows for labels, sublabel and distributors when applicable. For example, most of MGM's current output is handled by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, with both studios receiving credit on the covers. Multiple fields allows them both to be handled. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Synner:
They aren't CREDITED ANYWHERE on ANY Criterion title, we don't invent data, they don't exist for our purposes. Call it what you will Image is not a Distributor for Criterion, they ONLY exits in relation to their OWN catalog.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't control the number of fields, synner. We will see what ken does in 3.5, I know what he told us. If he gives us only one field, nothing will change, if he gives us more, we will see, but IN ANY EVENT Image doesn't enter the picture relative to Criterion, it simply is not credited and as such to claim otherwise is inventing data which we do not do. That would fall into the realm of a LOCAL decision that has no bearing on the Online at al.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Synner:
They aren't CREDITED ANYWHERE on ANY Criterion title, we don't invent data, they don't exist for our purposes. Call it what you will Image is not a Distributor for Criterion, they ONLY exits in relation to their OWN catalog.
Skip You're wrong. I have the complete Criterion Collection. Without doing a full check, I can verify that Image is credited on THE LAST EMPEROR's back cover. Besides, no one here is actually calling for Image to be listed. It is just an example of a distributor vs. a DVD label. Don't get hung up on that one example. It is a Devil's Advocate's argument that techinically, Image is the distributor. The bigger point was Disney DVD vs. BVHE, where both are always listed on the covers. Disney DVD is more important, IMHO, than BVHE, since BVHE could be any of their subsidaries. Here's a quote from Wikipedia regarding BVHE: "Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Inc., distributes DVDs under the labels Walt Disney Home Entertainment, Touchstone Home Entertainment, Miramax Home Entertainment and Buena Vista Home Entertainment. The company and its predecessors formerly distributed other labels such as Hollywood Pictures Home Video, Dimension Home Video, and Muppet Home Video. With the coming of DVD, "Home Entertainment" replaced "Home Video" in label names." If we only used BVHE, it could be a Disney film, a Miramax film a Touchstone film, etc. Wherease the proper label (Disney DVD, Miramax Home Entertainment, etc.) lets us know. But as I said, multiple fields make this whole argument moot. |
| | Registered: May 26, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 599 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting synner_man: Quote:
Synner:
You're wrong. I have the complete Criterion Collection. Without doing a full check, I can verify that Image is credited on THE LAST EMPEROR's back cover. I had it in front of me as I read the post, you're right, it's listed on the back. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,911 |
| | Posted: | | | | Also, the Armageddon Criterion was distributed by BVHE. I know this from the hoops I had to jump through to get a replacement for my ringrot edition! | | | | Signature banned: Reason out of date... |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | I pulled a stack of Criterions off my shelf and found the Image logo on The Last Emperor and The Double Life of Veronique. But it doesn't seem to be a result of their distribution deal with Image. For example, Image is not listed on Jacques Tati's Trafic (not to be confused with Soderbergh's Traffic), which was just released last week.
On The Last Emperor, the copyright section says "Under exclusive license from Hanway Films Limited © Copyright 1987 Yanco Films Limited and Tao Films, s.r.l. All rights reserved. © 2008 The Criterion Collection...."
On The Double Life of Veronique, the Image logo is present and it says "Under exclusive license from Image Entertainment. © 1991 Sideral Productions S.A. All rights reserved. © 2006 The Criterion Collection...."
For Trafic, the Image logo is not present but the StudioCanal logo is. It says "Under exclusive license from StudioCanal © 1971 - StudioCanal/Selenia Cinematographica (Italy). All rights reserved. © 2008 The Criterion Collection...."
For most of them, it says "Under exclusive license from" followed by the name of a studio or owner for which the logo is present on the back. That one for The Last Emperor is unique amongst the ones I checked in that it shows the Image logo but they aren't listed as the "Under exclusive license from" entity.
Anyway, I support the idea of calling this DVD Label or something other than distributor. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
For most of them, it says "Under exclusive license from" followed by the name of a studio or owner for which the logo is present on the back. That one for The Last Emperor is unique amongst the ones I checked in that it shows the Image logo but they aren't listed as the "Under exclusive license from" entity.
Anyway, I support the idea of calling this DVD Label or something other than distributor. Oh, I know why Image is credited on those titles (they made a deal over a year ago with Criterion to release a series of titles), I was just disputing Skip's claim that they weren't credited anywhere on ANY Criterion. You will also see Fox, Universal and BVHE credited in similar ways on Criterion titles that they licensed it from. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Read what I said synner, VEREY CAREFULLY. My position is no different, you found SOME instances where Image is credited and, of course in such instances I would have no problem, BUT Criterion has a sizable catalog and on 98% (at least) theree is NO REFERENCE to Image thus any attempt to post them as Distributor has a basis in imagination and not FACT. We recently had a discussion regarding WSHE and BVHE and it seems that , EVEN Disney has yet to decide the issue. The first title to use WSHE, 101 Dalmatians, does NOT list BVHE AT ALL, though at least some more recent releases are using BOTH WSHE pPLS the Distribution by BVHE. Note I will never argue based on hard data, synner, but I will always argue against ANY kind of Contribution which is based on imagination or user-interpretation. The FACT remains that for the vast majority of Criterion's catalog one cannot say that Image is the distributor, to argue otherwise is simply utter nonsense, but on the title that you found a refenece to Image then fine. What seems to be very amusing to me is what appears to be an almost desperate desire to dispute what Skip says without any understanding of what Skip is saying.  It's a real shame. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Read what I said synner, VEREY CAREFULLY. My position is no different, you found SOME instances where Image is credited and, of course in such instances I would have no problem, BUT Criterion has a sizable catalog and on 98% (at least) theree is NO REFERENCE to Image thus any attempt to post them as Distributor has a basis in imagination and not FACT.
We recently had a discussion regarding WSHE and BVHE and it seems that , EVEN Disney has yet to decide the issue. The first title to use WSHE, 101 Dalmatians, does NOT list BVHE AT ALL, though at least some more recent releases are using BOTH WSHE pPLS the Distribution by BVHE.
Note I will never argue based on hard data, synner, but I will always argue against ANY kind of Contribution which is based on imagination or user-interpretation. The FACT remains that for the vast majority of Criterion's catalog one cannot say that Image is the distributor, to argue otherwise is simply utter nonsense, but on the title that you found a refenece to Image then fine.
What seems to be very amusing to me is what appears to be an almost desperate desire to dispute what Skip says without any understanding of what Skip is saying. It's a real shame.
Skip I don't know why you are trying to pick a fight. You need to re-read my posts. I was correcting your erroneous statement that "[Image isn't] CREDITED ANYWHERE on ANY Criterion title" by showing that was wrong. Simple as that. And you are still wrong that Image is not the distributor (or else you are confusing distributor - the actual distribution of the discs - with production) when it has been proven that Image does distribute the discs. No one is calling for them to be listed as the distributor in any Criterion field. The entire point of this argument is to prevent such a thing from happening by clarifying the rules beforehand, since (as seen here) someone could argue what the distributor really is. Image was just an example (one that you seem to focused exclusively on) of what future contributors might argue. I've repeatedly made the point of the bigger example of BVHE and how that alone is useless if the title is from Touchstone, Miramax, etc. The same question arises on sublabels (if credit goes to the parent company of Media Blasters, or its sublabels of Tokyo Shock, Shriek Show, etc. - and the same applies to Criterion with Eclipse). Maybe Ken has already answered them in a rules revision and all of this bickering is pointless. However, these questions are legitmate and need answering before the oncoming rush of contributions once 3.5 hits. But to deny the potential problem even exists is foolish. | | | | Last edited: by synnerman |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Synner:
I am not trying to pick a fight from my POV, someone is but it ain't me, and i am not pointing the finger at you.
My position is very simple FACTUAL data ONLY. If Image is NOT credited on a given title they are NOT the Distributor, what you know, I know, gard knows or anyone is completely IRRELEVANT. By the same token if youy find a title in which Image is credited then FINE. No FICTIONAL or IMAGINARY data, if it is on the cover or maybe the Disc itself, then fine, if not then the answer is NO. And that position can be extended to ANY given piece of data. If the credit says a Role is John, then for you to try and list the Role as John Smith is WRONG, even IF you say you heard his name mentioned in the movie, I deal in facts not user-imagination in ANY form for ANY given piece of data.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Based on FACTUAL data ONLY then, who, in your opinion, is the distributor for The Last Emperor?
I believe that the best data to record there would be The Criterion Collection.
If the presence of the Image Entertainment logo on that package makes anyone want to put Image Entertainment there, I would hope that the rules will clarify that it should be The Criterion Collection. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | James:
Since I haven't looked at the cover and no one has psted a piece of it for me to read. Based on what I have read and the typical Criterion data. I would list as follows
Whoever is listed as the Copyrighted Studio (Let's Say Paramount Pictures)
Criterion Collection
Image Entertainment
That is simply based on what I have seen posted without viewing the data on the cover, I will check it out. So give me a few.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Based on what I see on THAT cover I agree Image would be the Distributor for THAT title.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: Website Discussion |
Page:
1... 9 10 11 12 13 ...21 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |