MovieChat Forums > Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) Discussion > CRITERION DVD & Blu -- 6/28/16

CRITERION DVD & Blu -- 6/28/16

posted 8 years ago by hobnob53
14 replies | jump to latest

Criterion will release Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb on DVD ($29.95) and Blu-ray ($39.95) on June 28, 2016.

Here's the link to the film's Criterion web page, with full details and cover art:

https://www.criterion.com/films/28822-dr-strangelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb

I figured Criterion would release this movie sooner or later. They've been issuing a lot of films from Columbia, and this is an obvious title for them. About time!

[–] patrick_bateman_90056 8 years ago

Between "Clouds of Sils Maria" and "Dr. Strangelove", it's gonna be a test to either get them on day one or hold off two weeks for the summer Barnes & Noble sale.

"[Redmayne] is so thirsty for awards and not in a fun way but in a sad, desperate way" - Twitter

[–] hobnob53 8 years ago

Re the B&N sale, I only hope it's still on by the time Strangelove is released on June 28. That's normally pretty late for the sale, though sometimes it goes into early July.

[–] patrick_bateman_90056 8 years ago

The sale is always July and November. "Dr. Strangelove" will be perfectly safe to get in that time; the question is whether it will actually be available or not. The real question would be what July titles will they announce next month that make one nervous.

"[Redmayne] is so thirsty for awards and not in a fun way but in a sad, desperate way" - Twitter

[–] hobnob53 8 years ago

Actually the sale dates vary a little year to year (they have fallen into part of June in the past) but you're right, DSOHILTSWALTB should be available in the next one. I don't know why you're concerned whether it'll be available, though; B&N is always very good about having titles in stock (or at worst, being able to get them quickly), so there shouldn't be any problem in that regard, and the sale usually lasts between three and four weeks.

However, you make a good point about their July titles -- late-month titles may fall just outside the sale. (And then there's the early-August titles...!) I recall that once or twice B&N extended the November, but not the July, sale for a week, which covered a couple of extra titles, but that hasn't happened in a few years. But at least it's only a four-month wait from July to the next sale in November. It's all the titles that pile up in the eight-month gap from November-July that's aggravating. Of course, there's also the Criterion 50%-off flash sales that come up once or twice a year, between the B&N sales. Not quite the 55% you get off if you're a B&N member, but not bad in an emergency.

[–] m-huston92 8 years ago

Could this have any implications on other latter works of Kubrick's being released on Criterion? Should I be hopeful at all of such possibilities?

[–] hobnob53 8 years ago

m-huston92 -- At the moment it's probably unlikely that other later Kubricks will be issued by Criterion.

Of the eight films Kubrick made after leaving the US for Britain in 1961, two were released by MGM in the 60s (Lolita and 2001) and the final five by Warner Bros. from the 70s through the 90s (A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut). One, Strangelove, was a Columbia release.

As you know the label leases films from their studios (or whoever owns them), and while Criterion has such deals with most Hollywood studios (including Columbia/Sony), it does not have such an arrangement with Warner Bros., which currently controls both its own and the MGM library. (Also RKO.) Therefore, unless Criterion makes such a deal, it isn't likely any further Kubrick films will come out on Criterion any time soon.

The ones already on the label (The Killing, with Killer's Kiss as a bonus disc; Paths of Glory; and Spartacus) all come from studios, or their successors, with whom Criterion does have a licensing agreement (United Artists and Universal).

But, things may change.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (63057267) 8 years ago

Odd choice for them, since the Blu-Ray that's already available looks just great. It'd be wise of Criterion to focus their efforts solely on films that are unavailable on the format... and there are plenty of great movies that never surfaced on video in any format. Whatever, Criterion.

[–] hobnob53 8 years ago

It'd be wise of Criterion to focus their efforts solely on films that are unavailable on the format... and there are plenty of great movies that never surfaced on video in any format.

Couldn't agree with you more, cinesicko. Every one of the Columbia films Criterion has released so far has long been out on home video from that studio, most still in print. I'd really like them to start issuing films that haven't been released yet, and they have plenty of possibilities from several studios. But never with any other studio's films have they confined themselves exclusively to movies already released by the home studio. I wonder if there's a restriction to that effect in their licensing agreement with Sony.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (63057267) 8 years ago

There are lots of Columbia titles that are begging for BD treatment (e.g. HUSBANDS, GLORIA, LOVING, CALIFORNIA SPLIT, etc.). Criterion works with most major studios and each one has potentially big-selling titles waiting to be Criterion-ized. Warner, with the old MGM catalog, could provide them with enough gems not on BD to keep them busy for years (KLUTE, PAT GARRETT AND BILLY THE KID, BLOWUP, CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY, FINGERS, STAR 80... I could go on and on) not to mention what Paramount has (HUD, THE PARALLAX VIEW, LITTLE FAUSS AND BIG HALSY... You get my point). Not to say they haven't been getting my money. The Wenders releases are a blessing, as are the noir titles. Still, they tend to be spinning their wheels a lot lately... and they really embarrassed themselves with their DRESSED TO KILL release, which I wisely avoided.

[–] patrick_bateman_90056 8 years ago

The "Dressed to Kill" set was a great one. The only problem was the screwup with the audio.

"[Redmayne] is so thirsty for awards and not in a fun way but in a sad, desperate way" - Twitter

[–] !!!deleted!!! (63057267) 8 years ago

I wouldn't say that the greenish image with the low bitrate and horizontally squeezed frame justifies the designation of "great one". A wholly needless release, as the MGM release is vastly superior... and has a considerably larger file size for the film. Thanks, Criterion.

[–] hobnob53 8 years ago

Criterion has a deal with Paramount that has resulted in the release of some films never put out on homevid (such as Billy Wilder's Ace in the Hole, among others), and off hand I don't think they've ever released a Paramount title that was already on DVD or Blu from that studio. And of course through their deal with Universal they have access to the pre-1949 Paramount titles now owned by that studio, which has also resulted in several first-ever releases on disc (Make Way for Tomorrow, The Uninvited) as well as Universal's own films, although some of these exist simultaneously in both Criterion and studio editions (for example, Spartacus). Most of their Fox titles have been solo efforts, though they did release My Darling Clementine even though the film is still available from the studio (though not in BD).

As I told another poster one studio Criterion does not have a licensing deal with is Warner Bros., hence the absence of WB, MGM, and RKO films in their catalog. (Except for Badlands, a WB picture Criterion did release, but I gather that must have been a deal with its indie production company, although Warner is listed on the back cover.) But you're right, what a great library they'd have to choose from if they had such an arrangement.

Twilight Time has been issuing some Columbia films on BD so that may have some impact, but as I said before I just don't get the total absence of any hitherto-unreleased Columbia title by Criterion. I think you're right, they've been spinning their wheels lately. From your list of MIA titles you seem to prefer somewhat more recent films than I do but the point is good either way.

But I have to ask -- what was the embarrassment about their Dressed to Kill release? EDIT: Okay, I just saw the other posters' comments about the Dressed to Kill release. Is that pretty much your assessment of what's wrong with it?

[–] !!!deleted!!! (63057267) 8 years ago

First, I don't want to create the impression that I'm only interested in post-50s cinema. I own plenty of movies that are pre-50s, for the record, and am well-versed in that subject. Just sayin'. Strangely, it's the '60s and '70s movies that aren't being given the royal treatment (or ANY treatment these days) by the majors. I mean seriously... Where's WAIT UNTIL DARK? See what I mean?

But, to answer your question about DRESSED TO KILL: Surprisingly small file size for the feature (especially for Criterion), uncommonly low bitrate, greenish image, slight vertical stretching (elongated heads, circles become ovals), and generally too damn bright/washed out-looking. It's from De Palma's private negative, which simply must not have been stored properly. It's a mess, and frankly it's an eyesore.

That older MGM Blu-Ray is a dream, and Criterion's release makes it look better than ever. Superior color and contrast, significantly larger file size, notably higher bitrate... It's gorgeous, and I'd recommend it over the Criterion even if the MGM were the more expensive one. As it turns out, the MGM is about $12.

In my opinion, anyone who defends the Criterion DRESSED TO KILL is either desperate to justify their $40 purchase or they're online BD reviewers who get pre-release discs from Criterion for free. I bought the Criterion and kept it for the extras (which aren't much more impressive than the interviews on the MGM disc). Good thing I didn't sell my MGM BD to pay for the Criterion.

[–] hobnob53 8 years ago

Thanks for the details, I appreciate them. Actually Dressed to Kill has never been a particular favorite of mine, so it's not a do-or-die disc for me, but it's surprising that Criterion, which is normally so persnickety about its source material, would release such a substandard disc. (I take it similar problems exist with their standard DVD?)

You make a good point about many 60s and 70s titles. I've often found these to be poorly kept and reproduced and their quality compromised in one way or another. It is strange.