You Gotta Fight for the Rights....Well, to Party
The important difference between showing a painting and showing a movie...

Friends of mine who knew that I was into Hong Kong and martial arts movies back in the 90's had a thing for asking me about Crying Freeman. It was Christophe Gans first foray into the special effects-laden martial arts movie world prior to Brotherhood of the Wolf, and featured future Wolf-star Mark Dacascos. As Gans didn't have much of rep in the states yet, the primary interest was by fans of the Japanese comic it was based on. Over time of course, it was rumors about the production, then reviews from overseas, and then the inevitable: "Hey, why didn't it come out here?"

I never really investigated, and by chance I ended up working with the editor of the movie. He explained that it was all a market rights issue. The producers had already sold off the rights to some of the non-North American territories. Then when North American distributors became interested, they were already put off by the fact some regions had already been sold (they like to get their fingers into everything they can). Then the film's producers had a high asking price for the North American rights. The distribs didn't wanna pay it. The producers didn't wanna drop the price, and they keep selling the rights to other countries. And that was it. No one would budge, so no Freeman in America. (My God, that almost sounds like a weak historical joke.)

They both could have made money, and probably would have. Now all the traffic in that film comes by way of bootlegs. In the day and age of DVD, there's no generation loss. That's one thing going for the consumer, and way against the producer.

It doesn't end there though.

I think it was because I was just trying to be patient and block it out, but I ended up reading about the plight of the Blade Runner DVD box set. Sure I knew that one was bound to come out, with 7 different versions of the movie floating around. (Before any of you who didn't know that start drooling, keep in mind that the differences between most versions are minor at best.) Also, there was the issue of the rush job with the original "Director's Cut," but with today's technology and the popularity of this sort of thing, you knew it had to be coming.

Well, I understand it was completed.....but that's about it.

See. In the case of Blade Runner, there was the issue of the movie having gone over schedule and over budget. So the bond company had to step in to complete the film. For those of you who don't know, bond companies are insurance on independent movies getting completed. They guarantee that in the case of major catastrophe, natural disaster, or smaller things like budget problems, the movie will still be finished and the investors will get something back. Ridley Scott's li'l sci-fi opus was being bonded by Bud Yorkin and Jerry Perenchio (who owns Univision (?!?)). From what I'm led to understand, settling ownership and rights issues on any indie film is difficult to begin with because it's a committee decision, and once a bond company has to become involved it grows even worse as they too become investors.

Also, I should mention now that it isn't just a matter of buying out the vested interest of the other members of the partnership. Like anything else, they have to want to sell it, and if it's making them money, they usually don't want to. And as long as I'm sidetracked and were talking about trouble getting everybody together to agree, there's a fun fact I should mention: International rights to Blade Runner were owned by Sir Run Run Shaw, one of the two famous Hong Kong movie moguls, the Shaw Brothers.

Anyhow, from what I'm led to understand is that it's a little personal in this case. Apparently Jerry Perenchio is the big stumbling block in getting the box set out. From what I understand (and this is way second hand squared), Jerry is not a big fan of the picture. In fact, he hates it, and doesn't care to allow anything to happen with it. That's according to a lot of websites with sections and petitions on the subject. Assuming it's true, I don't get it...

Twenty years ago when the movie came out, it was a flop. It was a nightmare production, then it comes out and it flops. Oh, correction, it flops and was universally panned. So I can't blame the guy completely for not wanting to get involved heavily with it again. However, it was also one of the first movies to find it's audience on video where it has done very well. The Director's Cut had a fairly successful theatrical run, and a lot of critics retracted their negative reviews. I've seen it in revival theaters a couple of times and the crowds are always huge and packed. In my little search the other day, there's an awful lot of netnerd clamor for it. I don't see why you wouldn't want to put it out, whether you like it or not, knowing that it's likely to just be a cash cow for you. Maybe it's just not enough of a cash cow? Who knows?

I believe it's a similar reason with CIBY2000 and David Lynch. Lynch had a nasty break with the French company, after only completing two of a three picture deal. Now you'll notice that Lost Highway (the second movie) isn't available in the U.S. on DVD, and NewLine cited red tape as the reason all the bonus material was left off of the Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me (the first movie). Granted, the company doesn't make the money by withholding the movie but neither does Lynch.

The final one, I'd like to discuss which is quite possibly the stupidest one of all, is the plight of arthouse favorite Alejandro Jodorowsky and his films El Topo and The Holy Mountain.

I guess we can start by saying: Thank you, John Lennon. Now, I've never care about the Beatles one way or the other. I won't deny their influence on pop music, but I personally don't care for a lot of their catalogue. They're not bad songs, they're just pop garbage much like the other music of the time. I start getting interested with the later more experimental stuff, and some of their solo work. Anyhow, the early 70's was the age for rock musicians getting involved in the movies. After all, Floyd and Zeppelin paid for Monty Python and the Holy Grail. So Lennon talked their manager Alan Klein into arranging for Lennon to produce Jodorowsky's next film, The Holy Mountain. In doing so, Klein also somehow ended up with the American rights to El Topo.

Well, at some point, the director and his new American producer had a falling out. Jodorowsky has petitioned Klein to release his films, and there's a number of on-line petitions to get the films released. Currently, all that's available are rapidly degenerating bootlegs that come around every now and again. Klein has even gone so far as to sue Jodorowsky for screening his films at festivals. From what I'm led to understand from my research is that Klein will agree to release the films when Jodorowsky is dead. Nice. Jodorowsky claims that Klein destroyed the negatives for both films, permanently ruing the chance of their ever being near pristine copies of them being released again. According to Jodorowsky, Klein should be treated as a murderer for destroying his art.

Now I don't know what Jodorowsky and Klein fought about, and so I'm hesitant to place any blame. My first impulse is to side with the artist, but who knows if Jodorowsky really did or said something that was way @$hole. I don't know. All I can say is that it doesn't look good for Klein. It looks like he's holding the film captive and denying it to creator and fan alike. Of course, if you look on-line, it's not the only thing that people are complaining that Klein's company Abkco won't release (and that's not counting all the stuff on the Beatles' Apple label that's been tied up in legal disputes forever). On one end, depending on what's important to you or what side you take, you can either hope for Klein to die or Jodorowsky.

Keep in mind though, if Klein goes then that could lead to all new legal troubles for the life of the films, and new red tape. There's also the chance that who ever manages Klein's estate may uphold his decision to withhold the movies. Again though, they're two movies that are highly sought after based on their reputation alone. (Though I've had friends bring them up, I'm the only one I know that has seen them both). I would think at the very least Klein could clean house with a nice widescreen transfer on a nice limited edition disk for El Topo alone.

I don't know whether to be happy or sad that for once it isn't all about the money.

Of course, I read where authorities have busted a huge movie pirating company in Taiwan. Now considering that steals money from my industry I gotta be against that, cause ultimately it starts stealing money from me. On the other hand, it's thanks to pirates that I've gotten to see a lot of the movies I've otherwise been denied (I saw both of Jodorowsky's movies on dubs off of Japanese laserdisks.), especially Asian films. Even the ones that do get distributed here still seem to come out so long after the fact. The movie's almost dangerously passé by the time it arrives, and there's been 12 cooler things to come out since then. Not to mention my fears that the @$$holes putting it out are going to dub it or cut parts of it out as they so often do. Then I usually have to wait even longer for the official DVD release to get the original version and the original language...IF I'M LUCKY!

I work in the movies, but I'm also a movie fan.

What a conundrum...

One day hopefully it'll all be available from some great database anytime, anywhere any language, and any version.

One day.

Cheers.