The Criterion Collection

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by DarthJoshy

I just started collecting Criterion films not too long ago and only own the Wes Anderson movies, Brazil, Blow Out and a couple others. Are there any must owns that you guys can suggest?
Thank you

I own the entire collection and I've probably seen about half of them. Rewatching them has led me to the conclusion that not all of them are worth owning, so I may sell them in the near future.

Here are all my favorites (from what I've seen), though:

• 3 Women
• 12 Angry Men
• The 400 Blows
• Amarcord
• Antichrist
• Au Revoir Les Enfants
• Belle de Jour
• Le Cercle Rouge
• The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
• Diabolique
• The Double Life of Veronique
• Fish Tank
• For All Mankind
• Frances Ha (November 2013)
• The Gold Rush
• The Great Dictator
• La Haine
• The Kid with a Bike
• The Killing
• The Lady Vanishes
• Lonesome
• Modern Times
• Monsieur Verdoux
• The Night of the Hunter
• On The Waterfront
• Repulsion
• Revanche
• Three Colors Trilogy
• Traffic

[Edward J Grug III]

Thanks for all of the Eclipse recommendations so far, folks - I am checking them all out.

Originally Posted by hoytereden

I only own four but the Late Ozu set is my favorite.

Just read up on all of these films and that does sound good. I haven;t seen any of Ozu's work yet.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I own the entire collection and I've probably seen about half of them. Rewatching them has led me to the conclusion that not all of them are worth owning, so I may sell them in the near future.

Surprised to hear that!

I've seen you have some pretty big turn arounds after rewatching movies...

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

Surprised to hear that!

I've seen you have some pretty big turn arounds after rewatching movies...

Part of it is me really knowing what I like in a film and the other part is me appreciating a certain director's other works more, instead.

I won't keep 3:10 To Yuma (the remake is far superior), 8 1/2 (ugh...), The 39 Steps (Hitchcock has a ton of better films), or ¡Alambrista! (good one watch, but I won't watch it again), for example.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Part of it is me really knowing what I like in a film and the other part is me appreciating a certain director's other works more, instead.

I won't keep 3:10 To Yuma (the remake is far superior), 8 1/2 (ugh...), The 39 Steps (Hitchcock has a ton of better films), or ¡Alambrista! (good one watch, but I won't watch it again), for example.

We had to stop watching the 3:10 to Yuma remake, we weren't enjoying it so much, but we really loved the original. I love The 39 Steps too.

I haven't seen 8 1/2 or ¡Alambrista! yet, but maybe I had better check them out, eh?

[Wizard-of-Wars]

Originally Posted by DarthJoshy

I just started collecting Criterion films not too long ago and only own the Wes Anderson movies, Brazil, Blow Out and a couple others. Are there any must owns that you guys can suggest?
Thank you

Repo Man
Naked Lunch
Videodrome
Lord of the Files
Monsieur Verdoux

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

Top five Eclipses sets, folks?

Oddly enough, I don't have any of the Eclipse sets. I should correct that. When I do, this will be the first dozen I'll try to acquire and the order I'll try to acquire them in:

Late Ozu
Postwar Kurosawa
The First Films of Akira Kurosawa
Early Bergman
Silent Ozu -- Three Family Comedies
Kenji Mizoguchi's Fallen Women
Masaki Kobayashi Against the System
The First Films of Samuel Fuller
Lubitsch Musicals
Nikkatsu Noir
Early Fassbinder
George Bernard Shaw on Film

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by DarthJoshy

I just started collecting Criterion films not too long ago and only own the Wes Anderson movies, Brazil, Blow Out and a couple others. Are there any must owns that you guys can suggest?
Thank you

I especially recommend the ones that say "Criterion" on them.

But seriously, there are very few that I would hesitate to recommend, and only then because they aren't titles that pique my interest. Well, I guess I can definitely say that I don't recommend Salò. Not that it's a terrible film, but it's extremely difficult to watch.

Not all of Criterion's titles will likely be to your taste, but pretty much whichever one you pick to watch, you'll be the better for it.

[Figster]

Hi,

I was browsing the Criterion page over on Hulu and found a Keisuke Kinoshita film called The Wedding Ring. It stars Toshiro Mifune. I was just wondering if anyone has watched it? I wish I have access to Hulu I love seeing Mifune in non Samurai roles.


Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

We had to stop watching the 3:10 to Yuma remake, we weren't enjoying it so much, but we really loved the original. I love The 39 Steps too.

I haven't seen 8 1/2 or ¡Alambrista! yet, but maybe I had better check them out, eh?

8 1/2 is "an essential" but I don't see the big deal about it. Kudos for the original idea, but the execution wasn't the best, in my opinion.

[deepbreathsanddeath]

I've only seen one film by Andrei Tarkovsky so far. Solaris. I've been interested in getting Ivan's Childhood...

Solaris isn't a movie I'll watch much. It was often really fascinating and on one hand i love how Tarkovsky went about making it. But ultimately (and I hate to say it...) I found it boring. I like some slow paced, older foreign films so please don't assume I need a lot of stimulation to enjoy a movie. I'm not that type of guy. Solaris just didn't feel very entertaining to me. I appreciated it a lot but boy was it a chore to get through.

By the sounds of the review, Ivan's Childhood sounds like it actually has some atmosphere and mood to it. Solaris had moments of real mood and it was certainly beautifully shot but yeah... Just didn't do it for me. I don't think I am alone there either. I think I remember other members mentioning that they like Soderbergh's version more (haven't seen that one but that's not what this is about).

So... How would you guys compare Ivan to Solaris?

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by jayembee

I especially recommend the ones that say "Criterion" on them.

But seriously, there are very few that I would hesitate to recommend, and only then because they aren't titles that pique my interest. Well, I guess I can definitely say that I don't recommend Salò. Not that it's a terrible film, but it's extremely difficult to watch.

Not all of Criterion's titles will likely be to your taste, but pretty much whichever one you pick to watch, you'll be the better for it.

Yeah. Salo shouldn't be any where near the top of any reccomended blind-buy list. It's essential viewing, but only a very small fraction of those who do see it will consider viewing it again.

I only own my copy (which I bought for $13) for the supplements. Hopefully one day I will be in the correct frame of mind to experience it again (and for the first time in HD).

That said, I do wholeheartedly love In the Realm of the Senses. Not worth a blind-buy, but it's easily the most engaging of the explicit films criterion has put out thusfar.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

What hype? Did the film not help kick start the "New Hollywood" era of the 1970s? Yes it did. It's position in the annals if film history cannot be refuted.

That is not hype, that is just its historical significance. Further, I don't think very many people still look at the film as a shining beacon of filmmaking genius. Easy Rider is Easy Rider.

Easy Rider is in the National Film Registry! For those that need a reminder, The National Film Registry is the United States National Film Preservation Board's selection of films for preservation in the Library of Congress. This is not hype, this is history.

I love that film and can watch it over and over and over and over and over again! It's even better every time you see it again. I mean, just hearing the stories of the cast and crew while they were making this crazy film is just amazingly entertaining.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Yeah. Salo shouldn't be any where near the top of any reccomended blind-buy list. It's essential viewing, but only a very small fraction of those who do see it will consider viewing it again.

I only own my copy (which I bought for $13) for the supplements. Hopefully one day I will be in the correct frame of mind to experience it again (and for the first time in HD).

That said, I do wholeheartedly love In the Realm of the Senses. Not worth a blind-buy, but it's easily the most engaging of the explicit films criterion has put out thusfar.

AB, as pornographic and explicit In the Realm of the Senses is, it still contains enough tragedy and themes on the human condition, to make it worth my while. I am glad to own this movie and don't consider myself a pervert for owning it. I watch it to learn about filmmaking as well as the human condition (which sex is a big part of).

[brandon_260]

I can see myself picking up a couple Eclipse sets during the next Criterion sale. I'm definitely interested in the Bergman set, and probably the Fassbinder set. Right now I've only got the Akerman set, which I haven't even broken into yet.

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by brandon_260

I can see myself picking up a couple Eclipse sets during the next Criterion sale. I'm definitely interested in the Bergman set, and probably the Fassbinder set. Right now I've only got the Akerman set, which I haven't even broken into yet.

Didn't read back to see if it was mentioned, but anyway..I'd really highly recommend the Oshima set as well.

[jw007]

Well, I finally watched The Night of the Hunter, and man, what an amazing film this is!

I spent 2 nights watching this film twice (also with commentary on) as well as all the supplements except for the major documentary on disc 2 (which I hope to watch now).

This is a revival of German Expressionist filmmaking and also D.W. Griffiths' silent-era films. It's amazing what a great cinematographer (Stanley Cortez) can do with limited resources while shooting in a studio for much of the film. I am reminded of Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) which used those old fashioned techniques from early cinema, just like this film did as well.

But really the main star here is Charles Laughton, the longtime actor who directed this only feature of his (tragically it was not well received and the man never recovered from the negative press). It's a shame the world never got to see more films from Laughton. He put his heart and soul into this film and it is a genuine landmark film that belongs in every film lover's collection.

Robert Mitchum is creepy as can be in this movie. And like many critics have said, he plays the character like a cartoon, scampering and howling and reaching his hand out like a vampire (at times). He's almost comedic in a way.

Wow, I could go on and on about The Night of the Hunter. It's easy to understand, dazzling on the eyes and has redemption like none other.

It's a true American classic.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by deepbreathsanddeath

So... How would you guys compare Ivan to Solaris?

I've seen almost all of Tarkovsky's films (there are two of his short films I haven't seen yet) and Solaris is actually my least favorite. In descending order, this is how I'd rate his feature films:

(1) Andrei Rublev
(2) Ivan's Childhood
(3) The Sacrifice
(4) Nostalghia
(5) Stalker
(6) The Mirror
(7) Solaris

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by jw007

Well, I finally watched The Night of the Hunter, and man, what an amazing film this is!

[Show spoiler]
I spent 2 nights watching this film twice (also with commentary on) as well as all the supplements except for the major documentary on disc 2 (which I hope to watch now).

This is a revival of German Expressionist filmmaking and also D.W. Griffiths' silent-era films. It's amazing what a great cinematographer (Stanley Cortez) can do with limited resources while shooting in a studio for much of the film. I am reminded of Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) which used those old fashioned techniques from early cinema, just like this film did as well.

But really the main star here is Charles Laughton, the longtime actor who directed this only feature of his (tragically it was not well received and the man never recovered from the negative press). It's a shame the world never got to see more films from Laughton. He put his heart and soul into this film and it is a genuine landmark film that belongs in every film lover's collection.

Robert Mitchum is creepy as can be in this movie. And like many critics have said, he plays the character like a cartoon, scampering and howling and reaching his hand out like a vampire (at times). He's almost comedic in a way.

Wow, I could go on and on about The Night of the Hunter. It's easy to understand, dazzling on the eyes and has redemption like none other.

It's a true American classic.

My favourite Criterion so far!

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

My favourite Criterion so far!