The Criterion Collection

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by littleprince32

This reminds me of an interview Malcolm gave where he claimed Kelly didn't actually care about the film or the how the song was used, but since Kubrick never paid him he was seriously, seriously p****d and vowed to do everything he could to trash it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/f...-the-rain.html - You mean this one? Apparently Gene Kelly's wife apologised to Malcolm about it too.

I'm also getting the sense that a lot of folks have read the novel after watching the film, or, are American. Perhaps the American editors are correct in thinking the US would hate Chapter 21.

Also, I'm of the belief that Ordinary People should not have won the Oscar, nor should have Raging Bull. I'm going to be "that girl" who says Tess should have won over both of them.

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by captveg

In regards to A Clockwork Orange, it's a naturally divisive film. Honestly, it amazes me that it was as popular at the box office and among voters to the degree that it was, even for nominations. Even 2015 audiences with 45 more years of media saturation are commonly shocked by the film.

It probably also wasn't helped by other factors, such as Kubrick feeling he needed to pull the film from the UK after copy-cat violence from some wannabe youth gangs, or from Gene Kelly being absolutely pissed about how Singin' in the Rain was used in the film. A lot of the Academy at that time was still Old Hollywood, and Kelly was royalty within that group. No doubt that many would have refused to vote for the film based on defending their longtime friend and his views alone (the "Mickey Rooney ain't voting for gay cowboys" effect).

The issue isn't the violence in the film but rather how it's filmed in such a nonchalant almost deadpan manner that makes it shocking over forty years later. Much like Last Year at Marienbad or Last Tango in Paris, A Clockwork Orange is one of those films that many with otherwise great taste in cinema will hate while many others with nonetheless great taste will love.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by mande2013

The issue isn't the violence in the film but rather how it's filmed in such a nonchalant almost deadpan manner that makes it shocking over forty years later. Much like Last Year at Marienbad or Last Tango in Paris, A Clockwork Orange is one of those films that many with otherwise great taste in cinema will hate while many others with nonetheless great taste will love.

Agreed. That was my point.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I don't agree with this at all. if my memory serves me correctly, and captveg sorta alluded to it, Dances With Wolves was a runaway train at the Oscars that year. ...and who in their right mind would have voted for Godfather III?

or the point about Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line being in the same year... those two films could not be any different.



this I do agree with, but how many of these folks are tasked with voting for a major award like the Oscars?

Sorry, only Leg Lamps are worthy of this title.

[fancyclaps]

Anyone in here buy a clear criterion case to stick Benjamin Button in it? I don't know why, but it really bothers me when I look at that criterion and it's in a regular blue case...

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by fancyclaps

Anyone in here buy a clear criterion case to stick Benjamin Button in it? I don't know why, but it really bothers me when I look at that criterion and it's in a regular blue case...

I haven't. But now I'll never be able to look at it without being irritated until I fix it. Thanks a lot!

[jetthead]

Originally Posted by fancyclaps

Anyone in here buy a clear criterion case to stick Benjamin Button in it? I don't know why, but it really bothers me when I look at that criterion and it's in a regular blue case...

I have the slipcover for it which makes the difference much less apparent.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by jetthead

I have the slipcover for it which makes the difference much less apparent.

Great. So now I'm not only irritated about the case, but over the fact that I don't have the slip. This day is just getting better and better.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by jetthead

I have the slipcover for it which makes the difference much less apparent.

Which reminds me to get Time Bandits which comes with a lenticular slipcover. As nitpicky as we are now....Imagine if Criterion did slipcovers, Steelbooks, etc.

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by fancyclaps

Anyone in here buy a clear criterion case to stick Benjamin Button in it? I don't know why, but it really bothers me when I look at that criterion and it's in a regular blue case...

I did, and I had a custom cover made.

[lordmorpheus72]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

Which reminds me to get Time Bandits which comes with a lenticular slipcover. As nitpicky as we are now....Imagine if Criterion did slipcovers, Steelbooks, etc.

please no... too much OCD.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by lordmorpheus72

please no... too much OCD.

I know- I love/I hate cover art and cases vs Digipaks is quite enough.

[Needleman]

Just ordered the Salo Blu-Ray from Criterion. I have high hopes for the release. Can someone clear something up for me about that movie? I see that the Criterion release comes with an Italian LPCM track and a Dolby Digital English track. Can I assume that the Italian track is technically the official language of the film? Or is this a movie that doesn't necessarily have an "official" dub (ie they are all equally legitimate)?

[cakefactory]

Originally Posted by Needleman

Just ordered the Salo Blu-Ray from Criterion. I have high hopes for the release. Can someone clear something up for me about that movie? I see that the Criterion release comes with an Italian LPCM track and a Dolby Digital English track. Can I assume that the Italian track is technically the official language of the film? Or is this a movie that doesn't necessarily have an "official" dub (ie they are all equally legitimate)?

The italian one is more legitimate, it's entirely dubbed but it seems to have been filmed in italian so the lip movements match the dialogue much more closely than the english audio. The dub is also pretty bad and will most likely detract from the movie if you're a native english speaker, it sure did for me.

Basically every movie made in Italy from the 50s through the 80s was entirely dubbed in post, they made no attempt to record on-set audio. Different movies were acted in different languages, and even if they were acting in one language that doesn't necessarily mean it's the more accurate one. Ex, ones that were intended for export often featured the italian actors all acting in english, but their accents were so bad that they ended up dubbing them with someone else in the english version anyway, and then the italian audio had the original actors on the audio track but didn't match the lip movements at all!

[SlickDamian]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

Great. So now I'm not only irritated about the case, but over the fact that I don't have the slip. This day is just getting better and better.

That's first-world problems right there.

[Needleman]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

The italian one is more legitimate, it's entirely dubbed but it seems to have been filmed in italian so the lip movements match the dialogue much more closely than the english audio. The dub is also pretty bad and will most likely detract from the movie if you're a native english speaker, it sure did for me.

Basically every movie made in Italy from the 50s through the 80s was entirely dubbed in post, they made no attempt to record on-set audio. Different movies were acted in different languages, and even if they were acting in one language that doesn't necessarily mean it's the more accurate one. Ex, ones that were intended for export often featured the italian actors all acting in english, but their accents were so bad that they ended up dubbing them with someone else in the english version anyway, and then the italian audio had the original actors on the audio track but didn't match the lip movements at all!

I see. Thanks! I thought it was (still do kinda) strange that Criterion put a lossy track on the Blu-Ray for the English dub. Even if it's inferior I sort of expect Criterion to always put forth the most admirable effort due to their status and high prices. I can't say I care a whole lot though I guess. Criterion are great but I've realized more and more that there are other companies that do even better work for cheaper prices on more obscure titles. Doesn't matter.

Thanks again!

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by SlickDamian

That's first-world problems right there.

The phrase (which I despise, btw) "first world problems" describes pretty much every single post on this entire site.

[olivianewtonyawn]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

The phrase (which I despise, btw) "first world problems" describes pretty much every single post on this entire site.

Yeah, we get it, "first world problems" monitors. We are members of an online forum dedicated to blu-rays. So... that is what we talk about. It is not like we are members of a forum dedicated to relief efforts (or maybe some of us are!) and talking about Criterion booklets vs pamphlets. There is no higher purpose here that we "should" be focusing on.

[olivianewtonyawn]

On the topic of problems, I have a major one I could use some help with:

Which is the better blind buy?

Safe or Don't Look Now

I like everything else I have seen from both directors. Although, Don't Look Now does not seem too Roeg-like or am I wrong?

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

On the topic of problems, I have a major one I could use some help with:

Which is the better blind buy?

Safe or Don't Look Now

I like everything else I have seen from both directors. Although, Don't Look Now does not seem too Roeg-like or am I wrong?

Ouch. That's a tough one. Both are very, very good films with memorable performances by the cast. I'd lean toward Safe, but you really can't go wrong with either. You could honestly flip a coin and end up being extremely satisfied either way.

Yeah, I know: Really informative answer, eh?