The Criterion Collection

[The Bronx Bull]

Originally Posted by jw007

I highly implore you to watch this documentary or buy it on Blu-ray, if you're also a huge fan of The Shining like I am. Please check this out! You will be blown away. It's essential viewing for any Kubrick fans.

Where would one find Room 237 to watch? Is it on Netflix? Hulu? Amazon says the DVD is being released later this month.

Here's the thing: I can almost tell, prior to watching, that I won't like this film. But I want to see it anyways, as a huge fan of Kubrick's and The Shining. So I'd rather not buy it - especially this type of film, the kind you watch just once.

Any suggestions as to where to watch it?

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by ccg1978

The Digibook is sweet for Josey Wales! It is probably my favorite Eastwood flick. So many one liners!

When I bought The Outlaw Josey Wales and Unforgiven at Best Buy the other day, I simply bought the standard Amaray case editions, since they were incredibly cheap and since the digibooks were not readily available, but everything is the same on the actual discs. Besides, I often prefer the standard cases to digibooks anyway.

The Outlaw Josey Wales looks so much better on Blu-ray than I've ever seen it look before. After I watched the movie last night, I enjoyed going through all of the documentaries. Tonight, I'll watch the movie again, but with the commentary track.
I really look forward to seeing how Unforgiven looks on Blu-ray. I saw that movie at the theater on opening night, and I've double-dipped on VHS and a couple times on DVD.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

Not necessarily. If I remember correctly, the have upgraded two titles that were released after they starting doing blu rays. It probably depends on the elements they have available. Perhaps there was not a HD transfer available at the time.

You remember correctly. They started releasing Blu-rays with #450: Bottle Rocket. The two later ones that were revisited on Blu-ray a while after the DVDs were released are #485: The Last Days of Disco and #452: The Spy Who Came into the Cold.

For the record, the last DVD-only release was #534: L'enfance nue. After that, everything was released in both formats.

[jayembee]

By the by, Great Owl, in case you didn't catch it, Cohen Media is releasing Melville's Two Men in Manhattan (Deux hommes dans Manhattan) on 9/17.

[The Great Owl]

Does anyone know if Slacker is being released in a standard Blu-ray case or in a clunky digipak just like the DVD was?

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jayembee

By the by, Great Owl, in case you didn't catch it, Cohen Media is releasing Melville's Two Men in Manhattan (Deux hommes dans Manhattan) on 9/17.

Oh yeah! I'm on that like a slab of barbecue ribs. I'll be ordering it after mid-month payday.

[blkhrt]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Does anyone know if Slacker is being released in a standard Blu-ray case or in a clunky digipak just like the DVD was?

According to CriterionCast it is a digipak, even though the original images were of a standard case.

Edit: it looks like criterionforum has photos up:

http://www.criterionforum.org/DVD-pa...ollection/1197

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

It probably depends on the elements they have available. Perhaps there was not a HD transfer available at the time.

Back in the day, the really frustrating thing about the announcements were to read the words 'New, restored high-definition digital transfer' for a DVD only release, two of which, Spy & Earrings, have blu-rays announced within the last few months. Spy is supposed to look really good while Earrings is a bit debate-able. Night Train had a 'New, restored high-definition digital transfer', so who knows what the future may bring?

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

According to CriterionCast it is a digipak, even though the original images were of a standard case.

Edit: it looks like criterionforum has photos up:

http://www.criterionforum.org/DVD-pa...ollection/1197

Hrmph. Looks like I'll have to buy this one in person to check for damage, just as I had to do with Repo Man.

Thanks for the link!

[FaceInTheLeaves]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

All this talk about the early Hitchcock stuff is making me wish for Criterion to upgrade Carol Reed's Night Train to Munich to Blu-ray.

I caved in and bought Night Train To Munich and Thief of Baghdad on DVD a couple of weeks ago. And so, for entirely selfish reasons, I hope it's years before Criterion releases them on blu-ray, if ever (fiendish laugh).

More early Hitchcock would be good and I'm hoping for more Powell & Pressburger upgrades next year, especially A Canterbury Tale and I Know Where I'm Going. I'd kill for a Criterion release of Gone To Earth.

[ccg1978]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

When I bought The Outlaw Josey Wales and Unforgiven at Best Buy the other day, I simply bought the standard Amaray case editions, since they were incredibly cheap and since the digibooks were not readily available, but everything is the same on the actual discs. Besides, I often prefer the standard cases to digibooks anyway.

The Outlaw Josey Wales looks so much better on Blu-ray than I've ever seen it look before. After I watched the movie last night, I enjoyed going through all of the documentaries. Tonight, I'll watch the movie again, but with the commentary track.
I really look forward to seeing how Unforgiven looks on Blu-ray. I saw that movie at the theater on opening night, and I've double-dipped on VHS and a couple times on DVD.

Agree on Digi's, they don't fit on my shelf right and get in the way when I shut the sliding door! I actually think the PQ looked better on Josey than Unforgiven. That may be because I saw Josey previously on standard and not Unforgiven. Either way, both are 2 of the best westerns Eastwood has ever appeared in. Enjoy.

[joie]

Originally Posted by jw007

[...] Room 237 [...]

In Blade Runner, Deckerd's apartment number is 9732, if I remember correctly.

Add: Aide to Kubrick on ‘Shining’ Scoffs at ‘Room 237’ Theories

Did you watch the classic 1980 horror film “The Shining” and think it was about a man driven to insane and murderous rage by a haunted hotel? If so, you blew it. Or rather, you missed profound messages subtly embedded in the film by its enigmatic director, Stanley Kubrick.

That, at least, is the notion behind “Room 237,” a documentary by Rodney Ascher released on Friday. The movie is a series of voice-overs atop scenes from Kubrick movies by a small assortment of obsessives who have developed baroque theories about the true meaning of “The Shining.” One believes the film is about the slaughter of American Indians, another that it is about the Holocaust. Yet another claims it is a kind of apology by Kubrick for the putative role he played in helping to fake the moon landing. And there’s more. ...

If the lilnk doesn't work (the site has munched links to The NY Times in the past) google for "room 237 conspiracy new york times," without the quotes. That should get you past the paywall.

And the "9" in Deckard's apartment number is the floor number. Was "Jack" a replicant?

[Scottie]

Since we always get on the subject of Kubrick, I figured I'd share that I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey again today.

Even with the rain distracting me quite a good bit, I was still able to wrap my head around some of the complex things that were presented.

I truly believe that the film is about how advanced we have become and continue to be. The film starts at the lowest point in our evolution - the primate. After coming into contact with the monolith, they learned how to use the bone as a weapon. As the film progresses, we see how advanced the world has become, even to the point where mostly everything is controlled by a computer (HAL).

Of course, the film has its points that make you wonder. How did the monolith come into being? Was it man made or something out of this world? Is it possible that the monolith stands for the mysterious being that is God?

When we get to the end of the film, we see Dave enter a different dimension, where he sees himself age, die, and become reborn. I truly believe this is speaking about the life process. We are born, we spend most of our life learning a trade, we grow old, and we die. The process repeats itself.

It's truly a marvelous film and I don't think there has been a science fiction film quite like it sense. I really appreciate that Kubrick left it open for interpretation and didn't give the audience the black and white answers to what exactly is going on.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by iScottie

When we get to the end of the film, we see Dave enter a different dimension, where he sees himself age, die, and become reborn. I truly believe this is speaking about the life process. We are born, we spend most of our life learning a trade, we grow old, and we die. The process repeats itself.

Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.

Or vice versa. Bowman growing older represents his evolution beyond human, until as the Star Child, he becomes the embryonic state of a higher lifeform.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Since we always get on the subject of Kubrick, I figured I'd share that I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey again today.

Even with the rain distracting me quite a good bit, I was still able to wrap my head around some of the complex things that were presented.

I truly believe that the film is about how advanced we have become and continue to be. The film starts at the lowest point in our evolution - the primate. After coming into contact with the monolith, they learned how to use the bone as a weapon. As the film progresses, we see how advanced the world has become, even to the point where mostly everything is controlled by a computer (HAL).

Of course, the film has its points that make you wonder. How did the monolith come into being? Was it man made or something out of this world? Is it possible that the monolith stands for the mysterious being that is God?

When we get to the end of the film, we see Dave enter a different dimension, where he sees himself age, die, and become reborn. I truly believe this is speaking about the life process. We are born, we spend most of our life learning a trade, we grow old, and we die. The process repeats itself.

It's truly a marvelous film and I don't think there has been a science fiction film quite like it sense. I really appreciate that Kubrick left it open for interpretation and didn't give the audience the black and white answers to what exactly is going on.

Are you going to watch 2010 now?

[Abdrewes]

Wow!!!! If Cinema Guild hadnt picked it up, Neighboring Sounds would have made an electric release. It's well worth seeing before you compile a best of 2013 list.

[joie]

Originally Posted by lordmorpheus72

Nope. ;-) Not to me he wasn't... don't agree with Ridley there.

I am asking about the "Jack" in The Shining. I don't think that Deckard wasn't a replicant.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by ccg1978

Agree on Digi's, they don't fit on my shelf right and get in the way when I shut the sliding door! I actually think the PQ looked better on Josey than Unforgiven. That may be because I saw Josey previously on standard and not Unforgiven. Either way, both are 2 of the best westerns Eastwood has ever appeared in. Enjoy.

Unforgiven has always looked good, whether on VHS, DVD, or another format. By contrast, I grew up seeing The Outlaw Josey Wales in old full screen versions on TV. That may explain my bewilderment at how good the Blu-ray is, and I might very well have the same reaction after seeing both.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.

Or vice versa. Bowman growing older represents his evolution beyond human, until as the Star Child, he becomes the embryonic state of a higher lifeform.

Oh, interesting. Thanks for that!

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

Are you going to watch 2010 now?

Probably not lol.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by joie

Was "Jack" a replicant?

Originally Posted by lordmorpheus72

Nope. ;-) Not to me he wasn't... don't agree with Ridley there.

There's no question that Scott believes that Deckard was a replicant. But like you, I don't agree with the idea. In fact, I think it undermines the whole point of the story if Deckard is a replicant.

(I almost fell out of my chair when I watched the deleted scenes in the Blade Runner set, at the end when Deckard and Rachael are driving along the mountain road, and Rachael says to Deckard, "We were made for each other.")