The Criterion Collection

[zakzak]

I wonder why Criterion would not pick better movies from the action genre from guys like John McTiernan or Ridley Scott if they want to include flashy, commercial movies in their line up. Probably rights issues.

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by zakzak

I wonder why Criterion would not pick better movies from the action genre from guys like John McTiernan or Ridley Scott if they want to include flashy, commercial movies in their line up. Probably rights issues.

Everybody loved The Rock.

Ridley Scott has had Blade Runner in the CC at least. McTiernan is a good layman for action films, but nothing special beyond Die Hard.

Tony Scott was the better director for action movies.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

McTiernan is a good layman for action films, but nothing special beyond Die Hard.

There was that other little film called Predator, and Last Action Hero is an effective meta-fiction about the mega-action star stereotype, which could do with a good retrospective release.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

The Hunt for Red October is quite a great McTiernan film too.

The Rock is one of the best action films ever made in my book. I still can't believe Michael Bay directed it.

[Trekkie313]

Didn't know he did Last Action Hero. That movie definitely needs a commentary or interviews with Arnold and John though I think CC is way too much for it.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

Didn't know he did Last Action Hero. That movie definitely needs a commentary or interviews with Arnold and John though I think CC is way too much for it.

Criterion has a ton of modest entertainers or even mediocre films in the collection, not everything there is worthy of being called an amazing classic just because it has the benefit of being made in a bygone age or another country, or was made for artsy tea-drinkers

[zakzak]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Criterion has a ton of modest entertainers or even mediocre films in the collection, not everything there is worthy of being called an amazing classic just because it has the benefit of being made in a bygone age or another country, or was made for artsy tea-drinkers

Thank God

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by postmodel

Did anyone here put money toward the David Lynch doc? I had no idea it even had a kickstarter, but looking at comments on Criterion's page I see people are getting pretty annoyed since it's available for download, but they haven't received their copies yet.

I'd personally be annoyed especially if Criterion does release a sweet Blu-Ray for it and I threw in for a DVD....

But at the same time, their money did help it out so...

Not to mention it'll be available for Amazon Prime users for free on June 29th.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Not to mention it'll be available for Amazon Prime users for only $100 a year on June 29th.

Fixed that for you.

[malakaheso]

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film6/blu-r...gs_blu-ray.htm

[javy]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

Certainly more so than anything Terrence Malik did after Badlands.

Badlands is great. But so is everything else he's done since. The Thin Red Line, The Tree of Life and Knight of Cups are masterpieces.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by javy

Badlands is great. But so is everything else he's done since. The Thin Red Line, The Tree of Life and Knight of Cups are masterpieces.

Malick has made many great films but a filmmaker can only have one masterpiece.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by zakzak

I wonder why Criterion would not pick better movies from the action genre from guys like John McTiernan or Ridley Scott if they want to include flashy, commercial movies in their line up. Probably rights issues.

Studios weren't all that keen to license out flashy commerical action movies, as they tended to sell well enough for the studios to want to do their own releases instead. Michael Bay pushed for the Criterion releases, and Criterion was happy to do it because it gave them profits which could be put toward other releases.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Malick has made many great films but a filmmaker can only have one masterpiece.

That depends on which definition of "masterpiece" you are using. I feel like this discussion has appeared many times in this thread.

[javy]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Malick has made many great films but a filmmaker can only have one masterpiece.

Maybe. But I disagree.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by PrestonXI

Ever?!

Not until I get a region free player. I dunno how well the Seiki operates in European countries?

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by javy

Maybe. But I disagree.

Yeah I disagree as well. Scorsese has numerous masterpieces. It also depends on your definition of what a masterpiece is.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by javy

Badlands is great. But so is everything else he's done since. The Thin Red Line, The Tree of Life and Knight of Cups are masterpieces.

New world?

[javy]

Originally Posted by joy-division

Not until I get a region free player. I dunno how well the Seiki operates in European countries?

I need to get that.

[javy]

Originally Posted by joy-division

New world?

I started watching that once back in the day and never got to finish it. I'll pick up the Criterion disc sometime. I liked what I seen.