The Criterion Collection

[SkyAntoine]

With UK-UL game on Saturday and post-Christmas toy picking up yesterday, I only got to watch one movie yesterday. I had watched 1/2 of The Seventh Seal several months back and for some reason never finished. I was very into it last night and the movie stopped with 10 minutes to go. I tried it on multiple BR players and it won't play past 1:23:20.

Will Criterion replace a disc if I contact Mulvaney? This is the first time I have had a disc that won't play.

[mrjohnnyb]

Originally Posted by SkyAntoine

With UK-UL game on Saturday and post-Christmas toy picking up yesterday, I only got to watch one movie yesterday. I had watched 1/2 of The Seventh Seal several months back and for some reason never finished. I was very into it last night and the movie stopped with 10 minutes to go. I tried it on multiple BR players and it won't play past 1:23:20.

Will Criterion replace a disc if I contact Mulvaney? This is the first time I have had a disc that won't play.

I had a similar experience with Lola Montes. When I contacted Mr. Mulvaney, he made a note for himself marking down where the error occurred, and then asked me to mail him the disc. Within a week, I was sent a new disc.

[SkyAntoine]

Originally Posted by mrjohnnyb

I had a similar experience with Lola Montes. When I contacted Mr. Mulvaney, he made a note for himself marking down where the error occurred, and then asked me to mail him the disc. Within a week, I was sent a new disc.

My email response...

Originally Posted by Jon Mulvaney

Hello Anthony,

Thanks for writing. We have confirmed that certain Blu-ray discs pressed at a replication facility that we used for a period in 2010 have become defective, showing a noticeable bronze discoloration on the underside and developing playback problems. We have confirmed the problem on eight titles, but not on all copies. All of these titles have since been re-pressed at a different pressing plant, and the vast majority of discs in circulation should not be affected.

The confirmed potentially affected Blu-ray titles are:

SUMMER HOURS
WALKABOUT
PARIS, TEXAS
M
THE SEVENTH SEAL
PIERROT LE FOU
HOWARDS END
MONSOON WEDDING
MONTEREY POP
RIDE WITH THE DEVIL

If you have found that your Blu-ray copy of one of these titles does not play, please send your disc in to the following address for a
replacement:

The Criterion Collection
Attn: Jon Mulvaney
215 Park Avenue South
5th floor
New York, NY 10003

Please include only your disc -- no packaging -- along with the address to which you'd like us to mail your replacement. We will not be replacing or exchanging packaging. There is no need to email us in addition.

If you decide not to send in a disc that is playing fine and it starts to show signs of the defect at a later date, we will be happy to exchange your disc at that time. If we learn that other titles are similarly defective, we will add them to the list and continue to replace them as well. The best way to tell if your disc from the list is defective is by looking on the under side of the disc (the shiny
side) and if you see the letters 'BVDL' your disc will be fine. If you don't see those letters you should send in your disc.

Thank you for your patience and understanding!

Jon Mulvaney

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by jw007

I detest the films of Jean-Luc Godard.

There, I said it.

Blasphemy.

The movie gods are angry at me.

Lightning and thunder.

I'm sure I'm going to get eaten alive by going against Godard, but I honestly cannot stand this man's technique. I just watched Every Man for Himself last night and felt something I haven't felt in a while while watching a film: Alienation. These ridiculous editing techniques he uses, with the slow motion and sound editing drove me crazy. Why the hell would someone do that to a movie throughout the film? It was a total artsy fartsy maneuver. Maybe I'm not used to that but I was livid. Godard is NOT a director in my top 10, nor my top 20, or top 50 for that matter. I don't care if he made one of the greatest films of all time (Breathless) and invented French New Wave singlehandedly. I just don't like his movies!

Every Man for Himself alienated and distanced me. I didn't care whatsoever for this film. I'm ashamed for even buying this film for 50% off a while back during a sale.

Maybe I just don't get Godard, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Ingmar Bergman on Jean-Luc Godard:
“I've never gotten anything out of his movies. They have felt constructed, faux intellectual, and completely dead. Cinematographically uninteresting and infinitely boring. Godard is a ****ing bore. He’s made his films for the critics. One of the movies, Masculin, Féminin, was shot here in Sweden. It was mind-numbingly boring.”

Orson Welles on Jean-Luc Godard:
“His gifts as a director are enormous. I just can’t take him very seriously as a thinker — and that’s where we seem to differ, because he does. His message is what he cares about these days, and, like most movie messages, it could be written on the head of a pin.”

Werner Herzog on Jean-Luc Godard:
“Someone like Jean-Luc Godard is for me intellectual counterfeit money when compared to a good kung-fu film.”

Aside from my friends Ingmar, Orson and Werner, does anyone else have a problem with Godard besides me?

That’s great. Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Wim Wenders, Francois Truffaut, and Jim Jarmusch (who I know you are a big fan of) all admire JLG greatly and have paid homage to him in their careers one way or another.

Alfred Hitchcock might be the only other director from whom I’d choose his top 5 films over Godard’s. …and I still haven’t seen Contempt yet. Breathless, Band of Outsiders, Alphaville, Pierrot Le Fou, and Vivre sa Vie can scarcely be beat.

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

That’s great. Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Wim Wenders, Francois Truffaut, and Jim Jarmusch (who I know you are a big fan of) all admire JLG greatly and have paid homage to him in their careers one way or another.

A video to back this up, some of this "influence" borders past homage into a mirror image.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by jw007

I detest the films of Jean-Luc Godard.

There, I said it.

Blasphemy.

The movie gods are angry at me.

Lightning and thunder.

Well, i wouldn't go so far as to say I detest them, but surely they are not for me.
And seriously, sometimes I'm thinking that it's like we're admiring the Emperor's new clothes with his films. (i had read somewhat like this in a comment somewhere).
It's like he deliberately makes these weird films with the weird editing, spotting of music etc. just for the sake of it (for the critics to admire the "high art") and not to serve any real purpose or have any real essence.

Sometimes I think of a Godard film as the equivalent of John Cage's 4' 33'':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3

A "musical" piece which is considered "high art" but I see it as a "fraud".

[StLouisRibs]

You're supposed to feel alienated and dislike the technique though. That's where the talent is shown - he's hyper-aware of the viewer, and is playing with what people want out of art. Von Trier is the other most clear example of this style.

[ajburke]

Originally Posted by mja345

3. The King of Comedy
2. Goodfellas
1. Taxi Driver

I like your list. My top three would be the same, thought there are a select few that I've yet to see, After Hours chief among them. Here's hoping CC puts out a BD for it!

[joie]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

[...] Sometimes I think of a Godard film as the equivalent of John Cage's 4' 33'' [...]

I've never heard a recording of 4'33", but it might be interesting: chairs creaking, people coughing, etc. Have you heard Sonatas and Interludes for Prepared Piano? It has silences, but isn't completely silent. When I first played the CD, I thought something might be wrong with my equipment (during the silences). That was in the early nineties when I got the CD after reading Cage's (very informative) obituary in the NY Times. Since then I've acquired many recordings of his music.

[DaBargainHunta]

Originally Posted by jw007

I detest the films of Jean-Luc Godard.

I found out early enough that Pierrot le fou was going OOP, so I watched it on Netflix first...or at least tried to. Found it absolutely unbearable and never ordered the Blu. I know I could've bought and sold at a profit, but it wasn't worth it to me and I am not really a reseller anyway.

[oildude]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

Or, let's face it, the people who did see Tree of Life didn't care for it. I found it to be a very powerful and interesting experience, but it also felt like being in a daze after drinking too much cough syrup. It was not an "enjoyable" movie, and while I can recognize and appreciate its other merits, it's also something I quite frankly have no desire to ever revisit. It was $2.88 at Big Lots recently (and may still be), and I couldn't bite even at that price.

But your post was about cinematography. The lush setpieces and visuals of Hugo were a lot more interesting to me than the boring Americana neighborhood in Tree of Life, though the latter had some interesting and beautiful scenes. If your argument is that it's harder to compose beautiful shots, scenes, etc. when you're limited to a pedestrian house and neighborhood, and that is what makes Tree of Life more deserving, I'll grant you that. I still disagree, but I understand the argument. Not only were Hugo's environments more creative, so were the way they were shot.

I'm sure this will open up a debate on exactly what constitutes cinematography, and quite frankly, I doubt even the Academy members are entirely sure or would all agree on its meaning.


Hugo is a masterpiece IMO. This isn't being said out of some warped sense of Scorsese fanboyism, because I'm hardly a fanboy of his.

Hugo is a wonderful film. Scorsese crafted an interesting and entertaining story to captivate his audience while delivering to them a passionate message on the early history of motion pictures and how much we will lose of our culture and ourselves if we do not invest in preservation. From a cinephile's point of view, and as a lover of filmic art who weeps at the thought of the remaining older films decaying and lost forever from neglect, to me Hugo is one of the most important films ever made.

Film preservation is a critical necessity, but not something that makes for an interesting movie. That Scorsese managed to do just that, and got such a vital message transmitted in such an enjoyable, inventive, and beautiful way, places Hugo amongst his greatest films. I am forever grateful to him.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

Well, i wouldn't go so far as to say I detest them, but surely they are not for me.
And seriously, sometimes I'm thinking that it's like we're admiring the Emperor's new clothes with his films. (i had read somewhat like this in a comment somewhere).
It's like he deliberately makes these weird films with the weird editing, spotting of music etc. just for the sake of it (for the critics to admire the "high art") and not to serve any real purpose or have any real essence.

Sometimes I think of a Godard film as the equivalent of John Cage's 4' 33'':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3

A "musical" piece which is considered "high art" but I see it as a "fraud".

I take it you are not a fan of poetry or anything that requires interpretation. Is that correct?

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I take it you are not a fan of poetry or anything that requires interpretation. Is that correct?

Well, I'm a classical musician, and this needs often interpretation, doesn't it?

But i don't think it's a matter of interpretation with Godard films, at least to me.
I love eg. The Double Life of Veronique which isn't a conventional narrative film..
Or The Tree of Life.
So, i think your point is not correct.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

Well, I'm a classical musician, and this needs often interpretation, doesn't it?

in what sense? I wouldn't know. I'm a wee guitar player.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by SkyAntoine

With UK-UL game on Saturday and post-Christmas toy picking up yesterday, I only got to watch one movie yesterday. I had watched 1/2 of The Seventh Seal several months back and for some reason never finished. I was very into it last night and the movie stopped with 10 minutes to go. I tried it on multiple BR players and it won't play past 1:23:20.

Will Criterion replace a disc if I contact Mulvaney? This is the first time I have had a disc that won't play.

I sent him an email about a defective second disc for Carlos and received a replacement disc within ten days...no questions asked.

Though I believe the problem with the Carlos disc had been well documented and acknowledged as a first printing error by Criterion.

Shouldn't be an issue.

Then again, Mulvaney is like a box of chocolates.

...you never know what you're gonna get.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

in what sense? I wouldn't know. I'm a wee guitar player.

well, not all classical music is direct, accessible and straight forward like listening eg. to the Swan lake theme or a Nutcracker dance.
Music is art like poetry too, and it might even be more abstract than poetry because you don't even have words in it.
many pieces can have many interpretations, either in the narrative perspective and/or the musicological one.
(i'm devoted to the musicological part at this period)

now about Godard:
I think many people could argue that Godard films are like atonal music.
Atonal music destroys the conventions of music and to many casual listeners it may seem like a cat walking on the piano.
And although Godard destroys the conventions of cinema too (thus the comparison to atonal music), I think his purpose is just to impress and not for another reason.
It's like seeing music students today, that always write atonal music thinking they're writing a masterpiece and that if you write a piece that most people don't understand it will be considered high art. But if you tell them to write a simple melody (that doesn't sound simplistic) chances are it would be extremely difficult for them and they will fail.
So, that said, i would be very curious to see a simple, straightforward Godard film, and see what would he make of it.
Would he be able to retain the viewer's interest and raise attention and discussions about his film without his "destructive" techniques?
This is a rhetorical question.


Of course I could change my mind if I had studied cinema, i don't know.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

Well, I'm a classical musician, and this needs often interpretation, doesn't it?

But i don't think it's a matter of interpretation with Godard films, at least to me.
I love eg. The Double Life of Veronique which isn't a conventional narrative film..
Or The Tree of Life.
So, i think your point is not correct.

well, those films aren't really similar... wait.. before I reply, are you done editing your post?

Godard sometimes requires you to make sense of one scene at a time. how does that scene work within itself? and then later, the viewer is challenged with tying together the themes that may have present in various pieces of the film. ...and frequently, his dialogue is straight poetry.

I don't think people like that in their movies. The Double Life of Veronique is a bit vague, but I recall the manner in which it plays out to be rather conventional.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

well, not all classical music is direct, accessible and straight forward like listening eg. to the Swan lake theme or a Nutcracker dance.
Music is art like poetry too, and it might even be more abstract than poetry because you don't even have words in it.
many pieces can have many interpretations, either in the narrative perspective and/or the musicological one.
(i'm devoted to the musicological part at this period)

...and that's exactly what Godard liked to do w/ his films. and that's what people don't like. everyone is entitled to their opinion and I know that many don't like him, but take the love poem from Alphaville... I hardly think that is the work of a "fraud."

Alphaville - Jean-Luc Godard - YouTube

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

I found out early enough that Pierrot le fou was going OOP, so I watched it on Netflix first...or at least tried to. Found it absolutely unbearable and never ordered the Blu. I know I could've bought and sold at a profit, but it wasn't worth it to me and I am not really a reseller anyway.

As someone who's been trying desperately to find a reasonably priced copy of Pierrot Le Fou for a while now, I find this post to be deeply troubling and deeply offensive.

Perhaps you should take a moment to think about all the starving children in Africa who can't afford to buy Pierrot Le Fou before making such an insensitive comment.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

...and that's exactly what Godard liked to do w/ his films. and that's what people don't like. everyone is entitled to their opinion and I know that many don't like him, but take the love poem from Alphaville... I hardly think that is the work of a "fraud."

Alphaville - Jean-Luc Godard - YouTube

Never seen this film, that scene is so beautiful! Need to get myself a copy to view!