ALTMAN POLL

Aaron Spelling also has a producing credit on another favourite of mine, Three O’Clock High (1987).

I’m amazed that JAZZ ‘34 want included in the original poll

That's a favorite of mine, and I didn't even like Kansas City very much.

Not the best visual quality but here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48gZLCft9ak

Aaron spelling produced house of yes; i had forgotten this due to being enamored w parker

Happy birthday, Bob!

The only filmmaker I can think of whose death made me actually tear up, although others made me proudly sad (Nagisa Oshima, Seijun Suzuki, Bigas Luna, Suzan Pitt, etc.)

One anecdote about Altman, I was unaware of how much the man loved marijuana. Generally not surprising, but apparently the guy loved to smoke really, REALLY strong weed and more than a few collaborators have recalled others warning them not to smoke anything he offered them because if you do, you wouldn't be able to work or think straight for the rest of the day.

A short that he made in the mid-60’s, POT-AU-FOU, is about his love of reefer

Re: California Split & streaming & the cancelled Indicator Blu...This was just posted over at the Criterion Forum by a user who works with many UK labels, including Indicator:

I'm often told that "surely [insert title] must be available because there's clearly an HD master out there" - but that master may have been created primarily for TV/streaming, which means that certain rights won't necessarily have been cleared. A good example being California Split, which exists in two versions: the full version as signed off by Robert Altman, whose theatrical and broadcast rights were cleared at the time but whose home video rights weren't (since this wasn't an issue in 1974), and a shorter version created by Sony in the mid-2000s for DVD release that removed a couple of tracks after they turned out to be too expensive to license the home video rights for retrospectively.

It appears that broadcasting rights automatically encompass streaming rights, hence the uncut version of California Split being made available for streaming - but, as Indicator found out the hard way, releasing the full version on home video requires shelling out what turned out to be an unrealistically huge sum (and unrealistically huge for Sony, never mind a small British boutique label). And while they could have released the shorter version, they reckoned - no doubt wholly accurately - that people would loudly protest not only because it was a cut version but also because the uncut version is easy enough to see on other platforms, so surely the label must be full of utter blithering incompetents who don't know what they're doing (and so on for several more ranty paragraphs).

And there's no easy way round this, which is why so many wishlists are full of titles that, realistically, are very unlikely ever to be made available on home video.

This goes before the first paragraph:

Part of the problem is that people think that sub-licensing is simply a case of the rightsholder handing over a master and wishing the project well - but in fact in order to get that master into a commercially releasable state there may be a ton of legal work involved, especially if the film dates from before the home video era when third-party rights may not have been fully cleared.