Maybe I won't be seeing "4 Months ..." or "Paranoid Park" anytime soon

Two of the most critically acclaimed films released this year, "4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days" and "Paranoid Park" also happen to have been released by IFC. Why is that suddenly a bad thing for me and many other movie lovers? Well, read this.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117981897.html?categoryid=18&cs=1

Well, isn't this a bizarre pairing, considering I stopped going to Blockbuster in part because of the lack of selection of indie movies. Suddenly a store that probably shelved more copies of the latest Sylvester Stallone or Christian Slater straight-to-DVD schlockfest than Gus Van Sant's last four movies combined is going to be the only place to rent his "Paranoid Park," at least in theory, for several years.

Plus, the indie section is only being set up in 1/4 of the company's stores, with distribution to the other stores based on title. So that means that, for some of the lower-profile titles, even if you have a Blockbuster there's a chance you can't rent them at your local store. (Not to mention the cities, like the one I live in, where there's not a Blockbuster to begin with). Not that it will probably matter anyway after a few months because I doubt most of the IFC titles will be found in any of the Blockbuster stores after they leave the new release rack, meaning if you don't have Blockbuster's online service, you're essentially screwed if you want to see one of them. Plus, given the company's history, I'd be willing to bet the extra space will come from not shelving any copies of indie films from other companies.

Thankfully, a number of the articles have stated Netflix and other video stores likely will buy up copies put on the market for sale after the initial two-month window and just rent those, but if not, it'll be a few years before I get to any of IFC's titles. There are too many other movies to watch, and I'm not going to reward IFC and Blockbuster for a deal that limits the availability of many films.