Kino and DVD Beaver

[Musashi219]

I feel I need to reply because I own a good amount of Kino discs and I can see where both Gary and Schreck are coming from.

I use Gary's site alot, mostly to see if the version of something I'm planning on picking up has a decent transfer - which is primarily what his site is designed for. And yes often I see a general trashing on Kino from DVDBeaver because Kino's discs aren't up to snuff with other releases - most of which are international discs. What is to be said for the folks who do not own region-free players that convert PAL->NTSC and so forth? I just became region free earlier this year and I've been pleased so far (Thanks MoC!), but before all that I was stuck with whatever was R1. I think this is something Gary fails to understand, that not everyone is region-free nor do they all own an entertainment system as finely-tuned as his.

Sure Kino has pissed me off before, but I also have to give them props for having the courage/balls/decency/whatever to bring alot of releases here to the States. I don't see anyone else jumping to release Kar-Wai's work or the Maiku Hama Trilogy or those great Alain Delon policiers. I don't see companies jumping at a chance to release the works of D.W. Griffith, maybe because they're like the AFI and don't want anything to do with The Birth of a Nation because of political correctness. The fact of the matter though is, while I would love (as would many others here) to see more films receive the fantastic Criterion treatment, this won't happen to every release. And I'm sorry but if the only way I'm going to see a certain film is via a DVD that looks like utter crap, then I'm going to go ahead and deal with it because who knows when that certain film will be given a proper release with restoration work. Sure some of the DVDs I have from Kino may crackle and hiss, have combing issues, and the like, but at least I'm able to WATCH the film regardless of technical problems.

All I know is I can't wait to see what DVDBeaver thinks of Kino's upcoming Battleship Potemkin release.

[Cold Bishop]

Well, in all fairness, the WKW are all available in superior editions (with the possible exception of Happy Together), so I wouldn't give Kino too much credit for those.

[Musashi219]

Well, in all fairness, the WKW are all available in superior editions (with the possible exception of Happy Together), so I wouldn't give Kino too much credit for those.

Oh I realize that but I was referring to the fact I bought the WKW boxset from Kino before I went region-free. I have upgraded since then.

[HerrSchreck]

The worst thing about people who don't know what they're talking about is that they don't know that they don't know what they're talking about. And, like every organism, they have their reasons.

I think you used this same line on me when you tried to deny that Eisenstein was an influence on Pabst and Disney.

Standard Development Lifecycle of a Shreck Thread:

Shreck makes a point.
Shreck's point is countered.
Shreck titters nervously about misinterpretation of his original point
Shreck's point is countered again.
Shreck shrieks and tries to redefine his original point.
Somebody bitchslaps Shreck.
A now hysterical Shreck produces an ad-hominem "you don't know anything" line without ever addressing a single specific point that anybody's offered.
Rinse. Spit. Repeat.

No senor, the thread was moving along at a nicely civilized, and well reasoned clip until you walked thru the plate glass door, stuck your foot into the flower pot, and clumped into the room knocking over lamps and People Without Problems.

If you'd like to know why you aren't taken seriously, it's because you're missing a point here that everyone seems to understand, including Gary, who has confessed to the possibility of his bias towards Kino, and why he is condemning interlacing-- and creating the impression to newcomers that it is neither standard or obligatory in most, pre-1927/8 releases -- on Kino discs when it is overlooked in others. Taking him at his word, based on his own reply here for the further reasons for his singling them out is the lack of Criterion-style cleanup and boosting, which is generally frowned upon in the business, and in fact rarely seen. There is no "cherry picking"... the man has reviewed perhaps .005 percent of their catalog, and even less of the crux of this catalog, which are the silent releases. The point of the thread is the repeated pounding home the fact that this company is not producing worthwhile releases, that he's had it with them, that he's fed up with them, that he's tired of putting money in their pockets. My point is that he's either 1) misinformed about the nature of the vast bulk of silent film disc production (in which case he should welcome the correction, ie the demands wrought by frame rates), or 2) biased against the company.

And my amusement and disregard of you goes on because of your silliness. One day you come on with "I'm glad Gary thwacks Kino because their releases are sub par", and then the next page you're coming on with "You're cherry picking. Gary praises Kinos releases." I'm sorry you're still smarting from your affair over Eisenstein & Pabst, but if you'd like to reopen that discussion with someone, there was a thread for it. I and zedz and David elucidated the facts behind Pabst and his editing, and for further blank-fill-in you might buy the THREEPENNY OPERA from CC and get more exposition regarding Pabst primary fame for integrating Hollywood style editing into his vamping on the general Murnau/Fritz Arno Wagnerian pictorialism.

And you're bordering on trolling kiddo with all that OT venom. Be careful.

[GringoTex]

why he is condemning interlacing-- and creating the impression to newcomers that it is neither standard or obligatory in most, pre-1927/8 releases -- on Kino discs when it is overlooked in others.

Again, this is a line of bull and I don't know if you're repeating it out of willful misinterpretation or unwilling ignorance. Gary has recommended interlaced Kino discs. Gary has condemned interlaced discs by other companies. Obviously, interlacing is but one factor Gary considers when judging a disc. The constant of hypocrisy you're grasping for doesn't exist. Gary's boycott of Kino (which I think is seriously misguided, btw) doesn't have anything to with silent films anyway. It's because he reviewed one too many (in his estimate) unwatchable sound films, and he thinks its irresponsible of Kino to release them at such high price points.

[tryavna]

he thinks its irresponsible of Kino to release them at such high price points.

They charge Criterion-level prices for a near-PD-level quality.

I've heard this particular complaint about Kino's pricing quite a lot. And I think Gringo is right that it's the biggest sticking-point with Gary -- again, probably because he has to pay full RSP instead of getting free review copies. But realistically speaking, Kino almost never charges more than Criterion's lower price-tier ($30), and although their discs don't seem to get huge discounts online, nobody should be paying more than about $22-$23 per title -- and considerably less if they wait for sales. And contrary to what Sevenarts says, relatively few of Kino's releases are of PD quality. (Just look at Gary's comparisons of Kino's Scarlet Street to the real PD versions.) In fact, many of their titles are fairly comparable to Criterion's early lower-tier titles. I mean, Kino's Applause is about as good as Criterion's Clair titles. Criterion's Nanook is no more outstanding than the average American silent that Kino releases (the Griffiths, the Touneurs, etc.). Kino's Contraband is about on par with Criterion's Pygmalion or Summertime. Etc. The problem, of course, is that Kino has never made the great leap forward that Criterion did toward the end of 2002, and perhaps as Schreck argues, they never realistically could have.

I don't think that anyone is denying that Kino has issued some real clunkers or that they come anywhere near to Criterion or BFI in terms of realizing the full potential of DVD technology. I also think that most people here are in agreement that some sort of prejudice is keeping Kino from getting a fair shake at DVD Beaver (whether that fair shake is simply getting their product reviewed in the first place or it's a more problematic double-standard that Gary may be applying). Perhaps the easiest two solutions I've heard so far would be: (1) Kino sending free review copies to Gary, which they may understandably be reluctant to do considering the largely negative feedback Gary gives them; or (2) Gary allowing somebody who already owns a number of titles to make screencaps and offer as unbiased reviews as possible -- and perhaps establishing a fairer tone and attitude that would make Kino more likely to send review copies to that person.

Notice I'm not suggesting that we give Kino a free pass. God knows I've squealed about their awful Liliom before. But I think that somebody who is aware of the limitations and inherent problems of transferring silent film to DVD needs to be doing these sorts of reviews. And I agree that Silent-Era is a good resource, but they don't always review the technical qualities of discs -- and they certainly don't provide the extensive screencap comparisons that Gary does. John Sinnott over at DVD Talk might be a good candidate/model, but his "Silent DVD" column is updated very infrequently. There's obviously a big hole here that needs to be filled.

[HerrSchreck]

Yeah, I've had some suggestions that I do it-- either to do it in contribution with Gary by sending over the grabs/reviews, or start a new site in conjunction with another seasoned cineaste who also has a large silent collection-- and I would really love to.. but I just don't have the time. That's why I care so much about Gary's site. My goal here is not to tear Gary or his site, or start a fight. My goal was not to piss Gary off. My goal was to open a dialog and let some air into the subject of his silent reviews to find out what is and is not "acceptable" for a silent release. This way every silent release escapes certain technological "myths", and that, given a good picture quality, interlacing is not an issue for thumbs down. Or if it is thumbs down, it's thumbs down for every release... in which case well over 95% of dvd releases go into the dumper.

[SoyCuba]

Yes, Gary has every right not to buy Kino's discs if he's disappointed with the company and just doesn't wish to use money on their releases, and therefore we need people who do buy those discs to review them instead. I'd be willing to do some review's for DVDBeaver although, at the moment, I don't have that much free time either. And I don't have that many silent movie DVDs yet but I am planning to get a whole lot more.

So Gary, if you're even reading this thread anymore, don't be surprised if I contact you sometime in the future on this matter. I'm not an expert on technical aspects of DVDs, but I would definitely mention if a transfer is interlaced, and if so, how bad the combing is. I think I can also spot standards conversions and tell how much damage there is and so on.

[exte]

So Gary, if you're even reading this thread anymore...

I don't think he is...

[Gary Tooze]

You see the reviews (films) that many of you (Peerpee, Petty Bourgeoisie etc. ) look down your nose at ex. Top Gun, Death Proof, Planet Earth etc. are the reviews that pay for the site to exist. Our bandwidth/hosting bills each month often surpass what we 'bring in'... and yet many of you wish me to delve deeper into a niche that is not cost-effective. The site tries to cover and/or compare every single DVD releases of every important director that we can. It's a shame we can't do more.

Kino sends me nothing in the way of screeners and I still find their general DVD production at a premium cost for value received. I'm entitled to my opinion - so are you.

It's a big cinema world out there folks and I haven't, personally, educated myself in all the wonderful silent works available. I hope one day I will embrace your love for that genre. Right now its my site and I'm into sharing my passion for Film Noir, Antonioni, Bresson, Ozu etc. and cheesy 50's sci-fi films. If I'm going to continue to bust my ass for this site I'm going to have to have the ability to indulge in my own interests now and again or it will seem like 'a job' - working for $2/hour (literally). If it doesn't match your criteria - I'm sorry. Try to respect my position.

It's great that so many of you have so much advice on how to run DVDBeaver and what to review and what deserves accolades, but until you pay the bills and put the 50+ hours a week into the site then, for now, I will respectfully take your suggestions under advisement. Thank you for sharing them.

Gary Tooze

[HerrSchreck]

I'd volunteer the idea we take the unconventional step of locking this thread now... because, unlike other threads, the subject is a human being who we all know and who is present and in the background.. and as the subject gets hot, that person is going to react. I dont think the thread can go any further-- at least of benefit-- and its' bringing out the worst in some folks. Or I'd advise folks on the "silent film" side to let it lie. The points have been made-- healthy discussion within a community of likeminded folks is fine (which was the goal, like any thread here)... but folks are getting unusually hot here which wasn't the intended goal at all (which is why I went to another thread to respond to the daily provocateur). You people may see me getting colorful and wild on other threads but I don't think that's appropriate here... despite my comments viz silent film, this guy works his fucking ass off at a neverending clip.

I'll point out again Gary, if it's even neccessary, that I consider myself an ally (certainly not an enemy), that your site has saved me countless dollars of grief viz a huge dvd collection that would look a lot different were it not for your service, which I understand is basically thankless at least in terms of dollars and cents. The goal was not to question the value of your site, or bash it in sum, but to engage you on a specific technical topic (which, even if you reviewed every silent release that came out, would still only comprise a very tiny part of what you do there) and just have a regular criterionforum.org discussion about it. I think we've had that (to the degree that all are willing anyhow), so.... avanti, amico.

Cheers,

[tryavna]

Gary, I seem to recall that, in the past, you also asked for contributions from regular readers about once a year. Is that something you've abandoned altogether? Obviously, you don't want to make it a subscription service, which might be shooting yourself in the foot anyway. But I recall many long-time readers were perfectly willing to make a small donation to the generally valuable work you do.

Having worked for an Internet company before, I can certainly sympathize with the economic issues you're facing re. bandwidth. At the same time, I would think that you'd want to appear to be fairly open to feedback (both positive reinforcement and constructive criticism), and perhaps the old donation system would make regular readers feel more invested (literally) in your site -- just as so many are (perhaps overly) emotionally invested, too. Then again, maybe that's what you want to avoid....

EDIT: Just saw Schreck's post. Perhaps it is best to close the thread. Having reacted negatively myself in an earlier post, I'd agree that none of us are really meaning to upset or personally attack Gary.

[GringoTex]

As long as the myth that interlaced dvds of silent films is "standard" has been demolished, I say lock away.

[Matt]

Locked by popular demand, apparently.

But I would suggest that maybe a few of us independently contact Silent Era to see if they are amenable to attaching additional (and full-resulution) screen captures to their regular reviews.