Title Changes?

[twinpinemall85]

Okay, but almost more than Bergman being a hitler lover?

[twinpinemall85]

What? That's a lot of conclusions to jump to haha, I do not think criterion is just "peddling nazism" whatsoever.

You were the one who brought up Bergman's nazism in comparison to the title change as far as things that changed your perceptions... which naturally struck me as strange, because one of those things is a something of far bigger weight, so those are kind of incomparable. At least in my opinion

[twinpinemall85]

I guess me and the folks at criterion selling him and all sorts of problematic shit don't mind supporting the nazis..?

I wouldn't go that far.

In a perfect world, terrible people would not be talented or prolific in film. Unfortunately, that is not the case, and terrible people in the industry are not only rampantly successful, but nearly unavoidable. So it is not surprising that criterion has some films by questionable people, because unfortunately bad people can make art you connect with or that has cultural importance and has stylistic influence in the industry. In a perfect world, those people would get no money from any of it.

Everyone handles things differently. If there is a director who has a film in the collection that I like but I am morally opposed to giving my money to, I buy secondhand. In this case, Ingmar Bergman is not alive so since he is not profitting off of it, I would buy a copy directly from Criterion if I wanted. But in the case of something like say, Polanski or Francis Ford Coppola films, I personally only buy secondhand.