The Criterion Collection

[theater dreamer]

Have you two seen Belle De Jour? I've no experience with Luis Buñuel whatsoever, but I'm tempted to blind buy this on Tuesday. Catherine Deneuve was hypnotic back then, and if Hitchcock said that Buñuel was the greatest director he's ever seen, that's high praise, indeed. I need to introduce myself to his work, so I figured this might be a good starting point.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

What and The Tenant are two of the Polanski films I know virtually nothing about. I kind of figured they would be pretty exceptional films just based on the ones he did in the same period.

One of the most attractive things, to me, about his oeuvre is the diversity of genres. He did horror, noir, romance, drama, war, suspense thriller, period. Too many directors have a comfort zone, as it were. They might occasionally work outside of it, but many times those experiments were less successful fare. Polanski can pretty much do anything he sets his mind to. That diversity of subject matter, and genre, is something he and Kubrick shared. From Paths of Glory and Full Metal Jacket, to Barry Lyndon, to 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Shining, Spartacus and A Clockwork Orange, you don't ever get bored with Kubrick. He might not have as extensive a filmography as others, but what he did will stand the test of time.

100 years from now, people will still be raving about the works of Kubrick and Polanski.

"What?" isn't great, but it's so weird that it's worth watching. I'll probably cave and pick up the BD. I love "The Tenant" though. It's an amazing film. Polanski is no doubt a genius. He and Kubrick are the type of talents that come along once in a generation, if that.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

Have you two seen Belle De Jour? I've no experience with Luis Buñuel whatsoever, but I'm tempted to blind buy this on Tuesday. Catherine Deneuve was hypnotic back then, and if Hitchcock said that Buñuel was the greatest director he's ever seen, that's high praise, indeed. I need to introduce myself to his work, so I figured this might be a good starting point.

Huge fan of "Belle De Jour". I love every Bunuel film I've seen. It's probably the best place to start out with Bunuel, and then get into his more surrealist stuff.

[theater dreamer]

Originally Posted by mja345

I definitely think it's more difficult for kids now to become film buffs without video stores. I'm in my late 20s and I grew up two minutes from an independently run video store. The guy who ran it had this insane VHS collection, tons of foreign films, just incredible looking back on it. My dad and mom would take me there all the time when I was very young. From about '91-2002, I spent an insane amount of time in this video store. I checked out movies I couldn't possibly comprehend at such a young age. I remember checking out "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" at 11 or 12 because I loved the cover. That video store, looking back, is the reason I became such a huge film buff.

I have a 15 year old nephew and he's square in the demographic who knows nothing but streaming. There's a real turn and burn philosophy among kids now as far as movies, music, books, etc. Very little is personalized because it's all digital. It's such a different philosophy than what those of us who grew up in the video store/book store age grew accustomed to. My nephew has seen very few movies pre-2000. When he was visiting my place last year, I showed him several Kubrick movies. And you could tell his mind was kind of blown because it was so different than what he was used to. I actually feel bad for kids born in the 2000s because they're susceptible to cultural bankruptcy in such a profound way.

That's funny. As you were writing that, I was perusing Buñuel's filmography on imdb, and laughing at the Bourgeoisie cover.

I happen to agree with you. Ultimately, I can't blame kids for not broadening their horizons; they can't seek out what they are completely unaware of. Classic films don't spontaneously fall out of the sky, and hit them on the heads. It's up to parents to introduce them to new things.

I've always felt very fortunate to have such an incredible mom and dad. I was introduced to art, great music, literature and film at a very early age. My folks took me to the Art Institute of Chicago for the first time when I was 8 years old. I was going with them to the symphony, and seeing plays, by the time I was ten. If I wanted to go out and play with my friends, I had to spend a certain amount of time reading to earn that right.

Kids today need to learn there is more out there than what's on television. Not all of them will love it, but at least introduce them to the possibilities.

[Helter145]

Originally Posted by joie

I am watching "The Brood" and trying to figure out what is important about it. Nearest I can tell, it's part of a new sub-genre, a type of body horror, but different: reproductive horror. That is the horror of the possibilities of reproduction: a child could be some sort of mutant: A monster.

Other reproductive horror examples in film might be "Eraserhead" and "Rosemary's Baby." Are there others?

As someone deeply interested in the horror genre this notion is interesting to me, yet I think there are some differences between those films that are worth acknowledging; The Brood certainly is about the fear of reproduction, especially when taken away from the boundaries of marriage and the male supervision, and as such I would argue is a very conservative piece of work, at lest politically; on the other hand you have Rosemary's Baby, which relies utterly and completely on its protagonist's perspective and depicts the demolishing isolation and anguish that can come from the restrictions of male hierarchies over the female mind and body, as such it is a much more compassionate piece of work, all the more terrifying for it, I would say; as such those first two occupy the two opposite sides of the reproductive debate still going around the world, the former in favor of close survelliance and the latter in favor of reproductive freedom; Eraserhead is altogether different, as it has empathy for both its protagonist and his baby, which although pretty physically repugnant is also harmless (rendered even more so by being wrapped in a blanket)...

Recent horror films like We Need to Talk About Kevin and The Babadook raise similar questions about reproduction and raising, and are both pretty damn good...

[Vinyl]

Originally Posted by mja345

I definitely think it's more difficult for kids now to become film buffs without video stores. I'm in my late 20s and I grew up two minutes from an independently run video store. The guy who ran it had this insane VHS collection, tons of foreign films, just incredible looking back on it. My dad and mom would take me there all the time when I was very young. From about '91-2002, I spent an insane amount of time in this video store. I checked out movies I couldn't possibly comprehend at such a young age. I remember checking out "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" at 11 or 12 because I loved the cover. That video store, looking back, is the reason I became such a huge film buff.

I have a 15 year old nephew and he's square in the demographic who knows nothing but streaming. There's a real turn and burn philosophy among kids now as far as movies, music, books, etc. Very little is personalized because it's all digital. It's such a different philosophy than what those of us who grew up in the video store/book store age grew accustomed to. My nephew has seen very few movies pre-2000. When he was visiting my place last year, I showed him several Kubrick movies. And you could tell his mind was kind of blown because it was so different than what he was used to. I actually feel bad for kids born in the 2000s because they're susceptible to cultural bankruptcy in such a profound way.

While kids now can be film buffs, I think the films they are getting into are newer and much more focused. I think there was a large shift in the internet of things from the 90's to the 2000's. It went from casting a net and picking up everything to casting a net and having algorithms narrow your net to only select certain things that someone predetermined. This annoys me because I have to dig deep to not see the same things displayed every time I visit the App Store or iTunes Store, anything that supplies digital content.

A lot of that has to do with the bankruptcy of locally and regionally owned stores as well as big box stores like blockbuster and Hollywood video. The reason for their failure was the popularization of behemoths like wal mart and Amazon. This as well as our society basically just letting it happen.

The biggest mistake I see is when the government changed a law that basically turned companies into individuals legally speaking. Now they are out of control and the government is turning a blind eye.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

Have you two seen Belle De Jour? I've no experience with Luis Buñuel whatsoever, but I'm tempted to blind buy this on Tuesday. Catherine Deneuve was hypnotic back then, and if Hitchcock said that Buñuel was the greatest director he's ever seen, that's high praise, indeed. I need to introduce myself to his work, so I figured this might be a good starting point.

My interest for Bunuel really sparked when I saw that Hitchcock had mentioned him as one of his favorites in the Dick Cavett interview on the Foreign Correspondent disc. Although they are quite different, I really haven't been disappointed with any of the Bunuel I've seen. That Obscure Object of Desire isn't a bad first Bunuel film either. Tristana again has Deneuve and is a little darker. Phantom of Liberty is absurd and quite funny. Discreet Charm was the least fav that I've seen.

I really hope that Criterion puts out something of his in B & W... I've only seen color films because of their availability on Blu-ray, but Viridiana and The Exterminating Angel are supposed to be two of his best.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

Have you two seen Belle De Jour? I've no experience with Luis Buñuel whatsoever, but I'm tempted to blind buy this on Tuesday. Catherine Deneuve was hypnotic back then, and if Hitchcock said that Buñuel was the greatest director he's ever seen, that's high praise, indeed. I need to introduce myself to his work, so I figured this might be a good starting point.

Buy it. It's terrific!

[The Great Owl]

Last night, I watched Zatoichi in Desperation.

Would I be a sick puppy if I said that this is my second favorite film of the series so far, next to The Tale of Zatoichi, and that it even eclipses that film in many ways?

Zatoichi in Desperation is the darkest entry in the series, by far, and it's full of heartbreaking moments, broken dreams, tearjerker scenes, gut-wrenchingly painful scenes, and viscerally disturbing violence. There's hardly any merriment or comic relief in sight here. What I like about this film, though, is that it shares the visual cues of a great many "grindhouse" action and horror films that I love from that era, complete with blood so red that the color fills the screen (just like in the Hammer movies), psychedelically disorienting cinematography, and intimate camera close-up scenes reminiscent of on-the-fly low-budget filmmaking. I'm reminded of movies like A Candle for the Devil, Cut-Throats Nine, or Blood on Satan's Claw. There's one insanely painful moment that made me think of the "finger scene" in Sharky's Machine. Of course, the sword battle at the end is unforgettable and insane, because Zatoichi is, in fact, really in desperation.

All right! 24 films down. I'm on the home stretch now...

[obscurelabel]

Originally Posted by WonderWeasel

I will take any Renoir on blu, especially if it has Michel Simon. He made L'Atalante for me, and was as good as Gabin in Port of Shadows. That'll probably be my lone pickup for June, since I already have the Sony Strangelove digibook.

WW, you may be familiar with it but it didn't look as if you have the Park Circus BD of Boudu Saved from Drowning. This is a wonderful film and the disk is terrific looking, has a few spots of damage/lines but otherwise looks and sounds startlingly good for a movie from 1932. The film and Simon especially are hilarious, and there are serious ideas about social, ethical, and philosophical issues to boot. (My suggestion for a double feature: pair this with A Clockwork Orange). I got it for about $10 but it's a little more expensive on Amazon.co.uk now. If you're not region free you can justify an inexpensive player just for this movie alone

[obscurelabel]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Speaking of Andrei Rublev, I recently recorded it on TCM. How does the film compare to Tarkovsky's other films?

Solaris is an all-time favorite of mine. I'm rather neutral towards Ivan's Childhood, Nostalghia, and The Sacrifice. And, sadly, I've gone all these years without seeing The Mirror or Stalker.

iScottie I have only seen Rublev and Solaris so I'm no connoisseur, but I found AR fascinating in a number of ways. I didn't find it slow at all, there is always something happening, although Tarkovsky definitely takes his time with the pacing. The movie is a feast for the eyes, with a use of space that I can't really describe, but a combination of deep focus, widescreen compositions, and dolly shots make every scene full of visual interest. Solaris was quite a bit different from AR and not exactly what I was expecting (but still enjoyable), but if you liked it I should think that you will find some value in AR as well.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

Have you two seen Belle De Jour? I've no experience with Luis Buñuel whatsoever, but I'm tempted to blind buy this on Tuesday. Catherine Deneuve was hypnotic back then, and if Hitchcock said that Buñuel was the greatest director he's ever seen, that's high praise, indeed. I need to introduce myself to his work, so I figured this might be a good starting point.

I'll echo everyone else. It's a great film and a very good place to start Buñuel.

TCM is showing Un chien andalou on March 30. It's one of the greatest (if not the best) surreal film I have ever seen.

[bwdowiak]

I didn't know that The Pianist is supposed to be so good.. Now on my radar. I'll try to see it some time soon. Thanks, everyone! :-)

[Vinyl]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I didn't know that The Pianist is supposed to be so good.. Now on my radar. I'll try to see it some time soon. Thanks, everyone! :-)

It's great! I saw it in theaters and blew me away.

[buffetfroid]

Originally Posted by Vinyl

While kids now can be film buffs, I think the films they are getting into are newer and much more focused. I think there was a large shift in the internet of things from the 90's to the 2000's. It went from casting a net and picking up everything to casting a net and having algorithms narrow your net to only select certain things that someone predetermined. This annoys me because I have to dig deep to not see the same things displayed every time I visit the App Store or iTunes Store, anything that supplies digital content.

A lot of that has to do with the bankruptcy of locally and regionally owned stores as well as big box stores like blockbuster and Hollywood video. The reason for their failure was the popularization of behemoths like wal mart and Amazon. This as well as our society basically just letting it happen.

The biggest mistake I see is when the government changed a law that basically turned companies into individuals legally speaking. Now they are out of control and the government is turning a blind eye.

This has always been the case. The fact is most people don't make the effort to discover things (movies, music, whatever) that aren't right there in the mainstream and easy to find. The newer movies are easier to find. Even with people who are "into" movies there is much less interest in films from the past than the present. Just look at the collections of a good majority of people on this website. When I was a TA in grad school--this was in 2000 or 2001--students were given the option of writing a paper about the "hip" and recent Doug Liman movie Go or any Woody Allen movie. And what do you think 90% of the students wrote about? And these were film students!!

I do agree that is harder to find movies to watch if they are not available on a streaming service, at least compared to going to a video store. That said, you can still rent discs via Netflix (right?) and most people have access to libraries that usually have old films and foregin stuff since they are deemed as having more educational or cultural value. So there isn't any more excuse for it now than there was in the past. People just don't care.

[SkyAntoine]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I didn't know that The Pianist is supposed to be so good.. Now on my radar. I'll try to see it some time soon. Thanks, everyone! :-)

Amazing movie. I ended up picking it up on blu from KimchiDVD...


Not sure why this hasn't seen a US release, but I would love to see it in the collection.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by mja345

I definitely think it's more difficult for kids now to become film buffs without video stores. I'm in my late 20s and I grew up two minutes from an independently run video store. The guy who ran it had this insane VHS collection, tons of foreign films, just incredible looking back on it. My dad and mom would take me there all the time when I was very young. From about '91-2002, I spent an insane amount of time in this video store. I checked out movies I couldn't possibly comprehend at such a young age. I remember checking out "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" at 11 or 12 because I loved the cover. That video store, looking back, is the reason I became such a huge film buff.

I have a 15 year old nephew and he's square in the demographic who knows nothing but streaming. There's a real turn and burn philosophy among kids now as far as movies, music, books, etc. Very little is personalized because it's all digital. It's such a different philosophy than what those of us who grew up in the video store/book store age grew accustomed to. My nephew has seen very few movies pre-2000. When he was visiting my place last year, I showed him several Kubrick movies. And you could tell his mind was kind of blown because it was so different than what he was used to. I actually feel bad for kids born in the 2000s because they're susceptible to cultural bankruptcy in such a profound way.

I disagree 100%. I think it's much easier, because every film (that's out, anyway) is almost immediately available, and in the best presentation it's ever seen. I had video stores growing up - and few of them even had foreign sections, or anything other than the "top" titles, which even goes for classics. I had to wait years and years to finally find copies of something I had heard about through the grapevine - and not to mention, no Internet to google and find out about a filmmaker's filmography and such.

If someone wants to be a film buff, they have to put effort into it, same as always. The problem today isn't the films - as I said, they are available now easier than ever. It's the lack of effort that plagues the world.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by Vinyl

While kids now can be film buffs, I think the films they are getting into are newer and much more focused. I think there was a large shift in the internet of things from the 90's to the 2000's. It went from casting a net and picking up everything to casting a net and having algorithms narrow your net to only select certain things that someone predetermined. This annoys me because I have to dig deep to not see the same things displayed every time I visit the App Store or iTunes Store, anything that supplies digital content.

A lot of that has to do with the bankruptcy of locally and regionally owned stores as well as big box stores like blockbuster and Hollywood video. The reason for their failure was the popularization of behemoths like wal mart and Amazon. This as well as our society basically just letting it happen.

The biggest mistake I see is when the government changed a law that basically turned companies into individuals legally speaking. Now they are out of control and the government is turning a blind eye.

I'm not sure sure what law you are referring to, but what killed off the local b&m video store was "progress". I remember going to the video store on Friday night, spending up to an hour trying to find just the right movie that wasn't already rented that day, and then having to rush back to the store two days later with the video so I wouldn't get hit with a late fee. Then Netflix came along and I could prioritize the movies I wanted in a queue, they would send them to my mailbox within one or two days with a postage-free return envelope and NO LATE FEES. I was in heaven, or so I thought. Then streaming came along and even going to my mailbox was too much work. There's nothing like instant gratification. Now, I don't have access to everything out there but between Amazon Prime, Netflix streaming, Hulu, TCM and my own video library, I have access to a lot. More quality films than my old video store, in fact. For a lot of people, including me, these are the good old days.

The video store hasn't completely died however. It survives as Redbox, which is the video equivalent of top 40 radio. It wasn't the government or even Walmart/Amazon that made it happen. It was consumer demand.

[pedromvu]

I am not sure exactly what is the formula for someone to become a film buff, but I know that people who worked at video stores easily became one, I guess you have to be open to watch any movie that gets in front of you.

With the internet it is easier if you ever get interested in what are the best movies ever, you will probably find a list with some old movies, the problem is some people never cares to watch those no matter how famous they are, some people will never care to watch silent or black and white movies for whatever reason.

All I know is that for now the market is still in our hands since we are the ones deciding by purchasing stuff, at least with the physical video, but if new generations are indeed very different I guess it will be reflected in the next 10-20 years for sure, Hopefully even if streaming is the norm, there will still be new restorations and classics shown in those services.

[Scottie]

Bicycle Thieves review is up.