The Criterion Collection

[jw007]

Originally Posted by kuro_sawa

Perhaps I should give it a shot

Yes, Kuro sawa, please, give it a shot. You might be pleasantly surprised.

[monorail91]

Any ideas on whether Gilda would be part of the Collection? That's one important classic that still hasn't hit Blu, plus the CC has released other key Columbia titles, like It Happened One Night. (And what a companion it'd be with Mulholland Drive!)

[pedromvu]

Today i discovered Taschen will be releasing a Charlie Chaplin Archives book, i wasn't even aware this lineup existed, they are all quite pricey but have an affordable Kubrick one, as well as Bergman and Almodovar.

Was able to pick the Bergman one "like new" from Amazon considerably cheaper than a current new one but it is still not cheap, but from the pictures and reviews it seems it is worth it, i was wondering if someone here owns any of the books in the series since most of them.

[duggie walker]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

Today i discovered Taschen will be releasing a Charlie Chaplin Archives book, i wasn't even aware this lineup existed, they are all quite pricey but have an affordable Kubrick one, as well as Bergman and Almodovar.

Was able to pick the Bergman one "like new" from Amazon considerably cheaper than a current new one but it is still not cheap, but from the pictures and reviews it seems it is worth it, i was wondering if someone here owns any of the books in the series since most of them.

I have all the Kubrick books - Archives, Napoleon and 2001 - and the Bond archives, the Godfather and Taxi Driver books and the SOME LIKE IT HOT edition.

Taschen make about the most beautiful books I've ever seen. They are super-high quality and quite definitive. I'd recommend without hesitation.

For those interested, they also have editions out or forthcoming on Marvel comics, Michael Mann and Ken Adam.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by kuro_sawa

Not even Wish You Were Here? I agree about 2001.

I have really went out of my way to ignore the remake of Solaris, and reading this thread is making me wonder why. I think it's spite or something because I keep ending up asking why did they remake Solaris? There is no reason I should find myself watching a remake of that film. I would rather just watch that film, or rather a shot-by-shot Gus Van Sant Solaris than a "different take" on it with the same nods to atmosphere and the like. I am guilty of not having read the novel though, which is why I feel like it's just spite I haven't watched that damned thing. Perhaps I should give it a shot

I think they remade because the author hated the first film, not 100% sure, also I'm sure they wanted to profit from it lol

Originally Posted by belcherman

I find TMWFTE one of the saddest movies ever, up there with Make Way for Tomorrow. Both movies deal with the disintegration of home and family. I thought Bowie gave a brilliant performance, and without giving away spoilers, I can only say that I ached for his character. You can see this film as an allegory, or you can view it on just an emotional level -- either way it's a very powerful film. You can also see parallels with Bowie's character in the movie and his Major Tom persona in Space Oddity and other songs. It works on many levels, but for me it hit home hardest on the emotional level.

Finally, years later I saw a similar theme, of sorts, in The English Patient, but that's all I'll say on that.

I really wish Criterion would re-release this one.

Under The Skin is also very sad and SJ gave a perfect performance - makes such a great companion piece to TMWFTE.

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

Today i discovered Taschen will be releasing a Charlie Chaplin Archives book, i wasn't even aware this lineup existed, they are all quite pricey but have an affordable Kubrick one, as well as Bergman and Almodovar.

Was able to pick the Bergman one "like new" from Amazon considerably cheaper than a current new one but it is still not cheap, but from the pictures and reviews it seems it is worth it, i was wondering if someone here owns any of the books in the series since most of them.

So are Kubrick, Almodovar, and Bergman the only three filmmakers Taschen has treated on its Archives line?

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by mande2013

So are Kubrick, Almodovar, and Bergman the only three filmmakers Taschen has treated on its Archives line?

I have the newer Kubrick edition, wish I had gotten the first release!

Didn't know they did Bergman, might have to pick a copy up! They are incredible release - wild be great to see more!

And wow tha Kubrick Napoleon book(s) looks incredible! Bit pricey haha!

------

Has anyone seen other works by Nobuhiko Ôbayashi? (he directed Hausu)

I didn't realise he had done so much after Hausu! I thought it was one of his only films.

So yeah, has he done anything else that is on parr with Hausu or even better?

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Old Geezer

HIROSHIMA MON AMOUR (Alain Resnais / 1959) - It's recently undergone a 4K restoration so I would not be surprised if it was released soon.

For me this is great news! Hiroshima Mon Amour and Pandora's Box are my two most wanted Criterion upgrades from DVD.

Ohh man, Hiroshima Mon Amour would be just heaven. Agreed on Pandora's Box, as well.

I would upgrade Hiroshima Mon Amour so quickly it would violate the laws of physics.

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by mande2013

So are Kubrick, Almodovar, and Bergman the only three filmmakers Taschen has treated on its Archives line?

Yeah aside from the new from Chaplin, they also have one from the James Bond series.

Seems a bit odd to have Almodovar among those three, but i guess they need access to a lot of documents to be able to make them, so i don't know if they can do one from whoever they want. One would think they at least would have one on Hitchcock.

I would love to see one from Buñuel.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by monorail91

Any ideas on whether Gilda would be part of the Collection? That's one important classic that still hasn't hit Blu, plus the CC has released other key Columbia titles, like It Happened One Night. (And what a companion it'd be with Mulholland Drive!)

I'm not sure Criterion would want to go through the trouble since Sony has already released Gilda region free in other markets. Even with shipping, it can be had for less than Criterion half off sale prices. I think Sony will likely release it themselves eventually a la Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, at least I hope so. That's why I've held off importing it. Of course, I could be wrong. I usually am about these things.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by belcherman

I'm not sure Criterion would want to go through the trouble since Sony has already released Gilda region free in other markets. Even with shipping, it can be had for less than Criterion half off sale prices. I think Sony will likely release it themselves eventually a la Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, at least I hope so. That's why I've held off importing it. Of course, I could be wrong. I usually am about these things.

The Italian region-free Blu-ray of Gilda is quite wonderful. I would like to see it released on these shores with more extras, though.

[Lordy]

Originally Posted by kuro_sawa

Not even Wish You Were Here? I agree about 2001.

I have really went out of my way to ignore the remake of Solaris, and reading this thread is making me wonder why. I think it's spite or something because I keep ending up asking why did they remake Solaris? There is no reason I should find myself watching a remake of that film. I would rather just watch that film, or rather a shot-by-shot Gus Van Sant Solaris than a "different take" on it with the same nods to atmosphere and the like. I am guilty of not having read the novel though, which is why I feel like it's just spite I haven't watched that damned thing. Perhaps I should give it a shot

Personally, I believe the Soderbergh version of Solaris is the better one, and I don't think it's close. I find the original too long, draggy, and often just plain boring. Additionally, the acting under Soderbergh is superior in every way (hard to go wrong with George Clooney, Natascha McElhone, Viola Davis, Ulrich Tukur, and Jeremy Davies), and the production values are greater. Solaris (2002) is focused on psychology and emotions of the characters and their relationship to the mesmerizing planet. I think this is what Soderbergh set out to do and i think he did it perfectly. The characters were actually interesting and we got a chance to delve into their psychological patterns and behaviors. I really don't understand why the Solaris remake isn't available in blu-ray, to be honest. The way Solaris (2002) was dismissed by the critics reminds me how Oblivion with Tom Cruise was generally panned in the very same way.

[Page14]

Okay, I finally finished the supplements for Solaris. This is the kind of film I could spend more than a week watching ... picking up on newfound elements (to me) with each viewing. But when I look at the stacks of unwatched films in my collection, I feel like I have to put Solaris aside for now and move on. I hope that by the time I do revisit it again, that I retain a good part of the bits and pieces of info I learned through the supplements.

EDIT: I wouldn't mind seeing the 2002 version sometime either.

EDIT #2: The supplements do give me an appreciation for the film that I'm not sure I would have if I hadn't seen/listened to them.

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by ArnoldLayne56

Amen. I enjoyed Solaris more than most sci-fi. But nothing can exceed 2001:ASO. Just as no album can exceed Dark Side of the Moon ;-)

Then why do you have a Wish You Were Here avatar?

Well for me, no film can exceed Contempt or Rules of the Game just as no rock album exceeds the first 19 tracks of The Beach Boys Smile Sessions. And we all know Meddle and Animals are Pink Floyd's greatest albums.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by mande2013

Then why do you have a Wish You Were Here avatar?

Well for me, no film can exceed Contempt or Rules of the Game just as no rock album exceeds the first 19 tracks of The Beach Boys Smile Sessions. And we all know Meddle and Animals are Pink Floyd's greatest albums.

I go back and forth between Contempt and Three Colors: Red as to what I think is the best film ever made.

As to Pink Floyd, you're all wrong, because "The Wall" is obviously the best.

[mrjohnnyb]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

I go back and forth between Contempt and Three Colors: Red as to what I think is the best film ever made.

As to Pink Floyd, you're all wrong, because "The Wall" is obviously the best.

You are mistaken. The best is The Dark Side of the Moon.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by mrjohnnyb

You are mistaken. The best is The Dark Side of the Moon.

To be honest, the choices are numerous with Pink Floyd. But "The Wall" had the most profound effect on me when I first was listening to it as a HS student.

[Snicket]

I haven't been keeping up in here as much as I should, but it looks like the dual format digipacks are starting to be phased out finally. Tess has been showing up in a normal plastic case, and Forign Corrospondent has been for a while as well.

Has anybody seen any others?

[jshaide]

Piper at the Gates of Dawn all the way.

[WonderWeasel]

Originally Posted by mande2013

Then why do you have a Wish You Were Here avatar?

Well for me, no film can exceed Contempt or Rules of the Game just as no rock album exceeds the first 19 tracks of The Beach Boys Smile Sessions. And we all know Meddle and Animals are Pink Floyd's greatest albums.

'Echoes' and 'Pigs (Three Different Ones)' are my favorite Floyd tracks, although I have a soft spot for a couple of the early singles, like 'Arnold Layne' and 'See Emily Play', or Rick Wright's 'See-Saw' on 'A Saucerful of Secrets'.

Not too long ago, I was having a discussion with my brother about what would have happened to their respective bands had Syd Barrett and Peter Green not "taken the brown acid", and suffered drug-induced psychosis (the jury is still out on whether or not this is exactly what happened to Barrett, but it's a safe bet that drugs were definitely a catalyst for his mental breakdown.) I truly believe that Fleetwood Mac would have been a much better band, and would have never written all of the pop-rock crap that they released in the late 70s-early 80s had Green stayed mentally fit and remained with them (I don't think anyone can listen to 'Rhiannon' and honestly say that it's a better song than 'Oh Well' or 'Need your Love So Bad'.)

Pink Floyd, on the other hand, I think would have faded into relative obscurity after the 60s, just because Barrett's songwriting was too esoteric and idiosyncratic to work on a large scale outside of England, though I do love the whimsical, "English" sound on 'Piper at the Gates of Dawn'.

Oh, and the BBC released a great documentary a few years ago called 'The Story of Wish You Were Here' that details the band's struggles trying to come up with something of comparable quality to 'Dark Side'.