The Criterion Collection

[deepseababy]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

No. Death Proof has all of the necessary ingredients for great cinema. Chicks and car chases.

(I've got no use for Planet Terror, but I've always loved Death Proof.)

Likewise. I've never actually seen Planet Terror, but I knew I loved Death Proof about twenty minutes into the film.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

Not to get all technical but I was under the impression that it was 24 years ago, I was quite surprised when I read that IMDB was around since 1990.

The IMDb started as a group of simple text lists to the Usenet newsgroup rec.arts.movies. It's existence as a database began in 1990, but that was really just the same lists searchable with UNIX scripts. It didn't become the website that we've known for years until the World Wide Web was born in 1993.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

My vote for the sexiest voice in the history of cinema comes down to a tie between Rita Hayworth and Lizabeth Scott.

Both runners up to Joan Greenwood. Me-ow!

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

As I've stated before, unless they change their minds, Peter Becker personally told me several years ago they were offered and refused to release Silence of the Lambs, because MGM already used all or most of the extras they previously produced. The only thing they could "offer" was a new scan/better PQ, which they don't feel is enough to warrant the investment of putting out a competing disc. It's a shame they have it 100% backwards, as PQ is what's most important (they are selling the movie) and extras are mostly frivolous and many times don't persuade someone to buy, but I guess they determine that form the market and what people purchase (and since most people don't know good PQ from bad PQ, the extras are their "selling point").

I don't think that's backwards at all.

[SlickDamian]

Originally Posted by discking

I rather doubt that, as no other discs that I own from no other brand from no other era produce this problem. Only the Criterion discs. I would suspect that the Criterion discs are passing some sort of signal that was assumed to be cut off by the range of the 2k standard but that, now, with the 4k standard, the set is somehow reading as noise when certain profiles are enabled. I would suggest that others with 4K TVs load up some Crit discs and try various profiles and see what happens.

Anyone else with a 4K TV able to see if they have the problem?

[ShellOilJunior]

I'll be seeing Red Beard next weekend in 35 mm. Also, A Short Film About Killing and Crime Wave. November and December bring the touring Wenders films, a Suzuki retrospective, 2 Bergmans (Fanny and Alexander among them but sadly the shorter cut), films by Jean Rollin and Rififi. I'd better start saving now.

[Rhettroactive]

Originally Posted by discking

I recently discovered what may be a serious problem with the way Criterion Blu-Ray discs are mastered or produced and what happens with those discs when they are played on 4K UHD TVs. Now, this example is limited to my own equipment, so it may also be brand specific. I recently purchased an LG 4K UHD TV. Great picture, many settings, many profiles, blah blah blah. But, 4K TVs of course consume much higher cable and component bandwidth or data transfer rates. They may receive frequencies that were cut off for or not present in 2K reproduction. When I tried to play several Criterion Blu-Rays, including the recent Room With A View disc, the image was filled with static and flickered badly. The image was washed out behind a sea of noise. Alarmed, I tried a different player than my default Oppo, same result. I tried connecting the player directly to the back of the TV, same result. Different cable, same. What I discovered was that the only image profile on the LG that would display the disc normally was "standard". Any of the other profiles, including "Cinema" and "Expert" and so forth were afflicted with noise and flickering. The Criterion discs were the only discs that had this problem. All other discs I own played normally no matter what profile was selected. I can only assume that the LG, as part of being a 4K TV, is receiving a frequency range in the signal that 2K sets do not, and that for some reason the Criterion discs, different from any other discs I have, are not cutting off that frequency range above what's needed for 2K reproduction. Anyone else having problem with Criterion Blu-Rays and 4K UHD TVs?

I have a TCL e5700 55" uhd/4K set that I purchased here in Qatar this summer as a budget holdover for a couple of years, and have been playing plenty of blu-rays on it from day one. I have a PS4 that I use as my primary player, and have had zero issues running Blu-ray Discs from Criterion, WB, Sony, you name it. Picture, sound, all of it looks and sounds as it should.

I can't say if this is a set specific issue with your panel, or something with the LG line. But I can tell you that, as a fellow 4K'er, all is good on my end. Best of luck, I'm sure you'll find a solution, amigo.

[adamhopelies]

I've not been on here since Thursday, so have to play catch-up.

In for Gilda and The American Friend from January's roster.

Saw Crimson Peak over the weekend. Really enjoyed it. The CGI didn't bother me one bit. As others have said it's not really a horror movie, rather a grande old-fashioned melodrama. It looks great and the performances are material apt too.

I'm a big fan of Tarantino and have never understood the snark thrown his way. Sure, he says some strange, annoying things, but I think that's all part of his character. Tarantino ranked -

1. Django
2. Inglourious Basterds
3. Pulp Fiction
4. Kill Bill vol. 2
5. Jackie Brown
6. Kill Bill vol. 1
7. Reservoir Dogs
8. Death Proof

Despite it being at the bottom of my ranking I still do like Death Proof a great deal. I just rewatched it too, for shocktober, and got much out of it. I think it's an important work within his oeuvre too, as this LWLies article argues. http://www.littlewhitelies.co.uk/fea...th-proof-31506

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by discking

I recently discovered what may be a serious problem with the way Criterion Blu-Ray discs are mastered or produced and what happens with those discs when they are played on 4K UHD TVs. Now, this example is limited to my own equipment, so it may also be brand specific. I recently purchased an LG 4K UHD TV. Great picture, many settings, many profiles, blah blah blah. But, 4K TVs of course consume much higher cable and component bandwidth or data transfer rates. They may receive frequencies that were cut off for or not present in 2K reproduction. When I tried to play several Criterion Blu-Rays, including the recent Room With A View disc, the image was filled with static and flickered badly. The image was washed out behind a sea of noise. Alarmed, I tried a different player than my default Oppo, same result. I tried connecting the player directly to the back of the TV, same result. Different cable, same. What I discovered was that the only image profile on the LG that would display the disc normally was "standard". Any of the other profiles, including "Cinema" and "Expert" and so forth were afflicted with noise and flickering. The Criterion discs were the only discs that had this problem. All other discs I own played normally no matter what profile was selected. I can only assume that the LG, as part of being a 4K TV, is receiving a frequency range in the signal that 2K sets do not, and that for some reason the Criterion discs, different from any other discs I have, are not cutting off that frequency range above what's needed for 2K reproduction. Anyone else having problem with Criterion Blu-Rays and 4K UHD TVs?

I have an LG 4K UHD television. To be more specific, here is my model: LG 49" 4K UHD TV (49UF6700)

I have noticed no problems at all with the Criterion discs that I have watched on this television. I use a $70 Samsung Blu-ray player and an LG sound bar in conjunction with the television, and I watch all of my movies on a customized setting that is close to the Cinema Mode on the television.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by stevieray44

Even though she's not from the classic era of films, my vote for sexiest voice would be Scarlett Johansson - especially in Sofia Coppola's Lost In Translation, 2003 (which I would pay any amount of money for if it got the criterion treatment!) I could listen to her voice in that film basically all day - even if she were just reading the phone book.

I agree that Scarlett Johansson has the sexiest voice of any present-day actresses.

I'd love to see both Lost in Translation and Ghost World on Criterion.

[Polaroid]

It's not exactly sexy but I'm a sucker for Samamtha Mortons voice.

Also love Naomi Watts scream/cry voice lol... But weird lol.

[theater dreamer]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

As I've stated before, unless they change their minds, Peter Becker personally told me several years ago they were offered and refused to release Silence of the Lambs, because MGM already used all or most of the extras they previously produced. The only thing they could "offer" was a new scan/better PQ, which they don't feel is enough to warrant the investment of putting out a competing disc. It's a shame they have it 100% backwards, as PQ is what's most important (they are selling the movie) and extras are mostly frivolous and many times don't persuade someone to buy, but I guess they determine that form the market and what people purchase (and since most people don't know good PQ from bad PQ, the extras are their "selling point").

Spot on.

If Criterion released Silence of the Lambs with significant improvements to PQ and audio, I'd buy it in a heartbeat, even if the extras had all been previously released.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

I don't think that's backwards at all.

You don't think its backwards for companies to care more about special features than the actual PQ of the film itself? okay.

I guess an old master with negligible detail and baked in DNR is fine as long as there's a bunch of interviews to go along with it then.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

You don't think its backwards for companies to care more about special features than the actual PQ of the film itself? okay.

I guess an old master with negligible detail and baked in DNR is fine as long as there's a bunch of interviews to go along with it then.

Extending this out to all "companies" is something different. Each of us will have our own priorities when it comes to a film's release (as will different companies releasing films). Some desire the top of the line PQ/AQ, others want robust suppliments to help them dig deeper into the film. Criterion specifically has always been about the "film school in a box" thing. I'm guessing the reason they didn't release VHS is because the format didn't really allow them to do the types of special features that were important to them.

I know they do release special feature-less releases now and then, but it usually only happens with a film they feel wouldn't get released if they didn't do it. They also drop the price since its missing a key element in their eyes, the special features.

I'm not faulting you at all for personally finding PQ to be your most important criteria in a release, but I think Criterion has shown it's not the most important criteria for them, so expecting that from them seems unfair at this point.

[Banned User]

Tarantino is above all unique. All of his films are homages to his love of films. He doesn't steal ideas from older films he is making movies that no one else is putting out there anymore and updating them with his own script and ideas. One other thing I love about him as a director is he gets these great actors that Hollywood won't hire anymore in A-list titles and gives them a chance to shine again. He is definitely great at writing dialog and has given us a ton of great scenes across many movies.

To write him off as someone who rips off ideas without realizing he is bringing genre's back and breathing new life into them with his own ideas shows a utter lack of understanding of cinema.

Now I can say his films to me are overly bloody and he peppers his dialog with more filth then I care for, but he has had hit after hit for decades now and proven he is not a one hit wonder. Plus his films have so much love of cinema in them its hard not to appreciate them if you are a avid film lover.

If your measure for great directors is ones who don't borrow, are inspired or make references to other movies then you might as well write off 99.9% of all directors. Out of the many directors working today, the majority of which never invent anything, but just use the same techniques created by others, Tarantino sits above most and whether you like him or not he has been a great influence to many film directors and utterly unique among most of his contemporaries.

Originally Posted by ajburke

I am one of those who doesn't like to consider Death Proof as a standalone film, since it originally appeared as part of Grindhouse, which I do consider to be one film. I actually like the full double feature version best, though I'm biased as one of the paltry few who saw it in theaters.

Personally I find the stand alone of death proof boring. While his dialog is good he loves it too much and I feel for most of his movies he could tighten it up it would result in a better movie. I prefer the grindhouse cut. The best thing about it is the faked reel damage. The missing reel in Planet Terror is hilarious as he plays with conventions. While the whole thing is a homage to the cheaply made double feature grindhouse drive in movies I feel it lost a lot of that with the separate releases.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

It's not just that nobody else looked like Rita Hayworth.
My vote for the sexiest voice in the history of cinema comes down to a tie between Rita Hayworth and Lizabeth Scott.

Sexiest movie voice of all time? No question, hands-down, no more callers, we have a winner.

[Show spoiler]Jessica Rabbit

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I don't believe Criterion competes with companies like MOC, Arrow or BFI, for example.

Criterion caters to North America while those companies cater to Europe. Furthermore, most people do not have region free blu-ray players so there is usually only 1 choice for any given film.

but the reality is that many people (especially those who are fans of international cinema) DO have region free players, so whether or not it was designed the way you have described is a moot point.

if Criterion does not take into consideration what Eureka (for example) is doing, they are making a huge mistake.

[lordmorpheus72]

Originally Posted by belcherman

Sexiest movie voice of all time? No question, hands-down, no more callers, we have a winner.

[Show spoiler]Jessica Rabbit

Truth!

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I'll be seeing Red Beard next weekend in 35 mm. Also, A Short Film About Killing and Crime Wave. November and December bring the touring Wenders films, a Suzuki retrospective, 2 Bergmans (Fanny and Alexander among them but sadly the shorter cut), films by Jean Rollin and Rififi. I'd better start saving now.

I've been eying that Red Beard screening, but I'm not sure if I can swing it this weekend. Enjoy!

[lordmorpheus72]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I agree that Scarlett Johansson has the sexiest voice of any present-day actresses.

I'd love to see both Lost in Translation and Ghost World on Criterion.

I'll second both of those movies. I think I suggested Lost in Translation once, but was of course told the many reasons why it couldn't or shouldn't happen. Ha! You know how it goes around here at times.