The Criterion Collection

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

Not that this validates my opinion or anything, but I have seen it several times. The car scene after the central set piece is fairly lengthy, as is the scene in the woods with a flashlight. It's a barebones style that echoes, I think, Haneke, creating an allure that manages to make a single line of dialogue entirely dramatic and efficient. I'd say some of of Bresson can be linked here in craft, mainly its use of repetitive action.

To clarify, this was not at all a criticism. I just think if you go into this film, you should go in with a mindset that it isn't a thriller. Maybe that's just me.

I got no Haneke vibe whatsoever. Nor Bresson. I've seen nearly half of RB's filmography and I'm not sure what you're talking about when you say, "repetitive action." Scenes are as long as they need to be.

I watched it with my wife and she loved it, too. If it plays out as you are describing, she would have fallen asleep which she often does.

So we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Ray Jackson]

I would like to see The Texas Chain Saw Massacre on Criterion.

I know there's no logical reason for it to happen, as the 40th anniversary edition provides a fantastic transfer and great special features. But it's such an important film imo...the seminal independent horror film of the 70s.

I would just like to see it.

...I would just like to see it.

[D2Girls]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I would like to see The Texas Chain Saw Massacre on Criterion.

I know there's no logical reason for it to happen, as the 40th anniversary edition provides a fantastic transfer and great special features. But it's such an important film imo...the seminal independent horror film of the 70s.

I would just like to see it.

...I would just like to see it.

It would be pretty pointless, since you really can't get better than the 40th edition release. Like, you really really just can't. If you ask me, it has one of THE finest transfers of any blu-ray disc... maybe my opinion is exaggerated a bit, but I really feel this way.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by D2Girls

It would be pretty pointless, since you really can't get better than the 40th edition release. Like, you really really just can't. If you ask me, it has one of THE finest transfers of any blu-ray disc... maybe my opinion is exaggerated a bit, but I really feel this way.

Totally agree that there's no rational justification for it.

...other than the fact that it would be so cool to see it in a Criterion case.

[D2Girls]

Oh so I picked up bottle rocket and rushmore... haven't seen bottle rocket yet, am looking forward to checking it out!

I've almost got every anderson criterion release now hehe. I'm waiting for fantastic mr fox to get re released as a standard release, because I am really trying to not aquire any more digipacks if I can avoid it. they're just going to get damaged in the future... so why bother.

bottle rocket used to be a digipack, apparently. so I hope fantastic fox gets the same treatment soon!

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Never seen Seconds.

...is it great?

It's excellent. I just bought the UK Masters of Cinema edition and was blown away. I actually watched it twice in two days, and am preparing to give it another spin tomorrow as one of my favourite theorists, Adrian Martin, did one of the audio commentaries. The UK disc is one of my very favourite releases of the year.

[CriterionBlues]

Originally Posted by adamhopelies

It's excellent. I just bought the UK Masters of Cinema edition and was blown away. I actually watched it twice in two days, and am preparing to give it another spin tomorrow as one of my favourite theorists, Adrian Martin, did one of the audio commentaries. The UK disc is one of my very favourite releases of the year.

I'll "Second" (okay, third) how excellent Seconds is. It is one of the most unique psychological science fiction thrillers, looks fantastic and represents the era in creative fashion. The early 1960s up to Seconds really was the peak of Frankenheimer's career.

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by CriterionBlues

I'll "Second" (okay, third) how excellent Seconds is. It is one of the most unique psychological science fiction thrillers, looks fantastic and represents the era in creative fashion. The early 1960s up to Seconds really was the peak of Frankenheimer's career.

I think it's his masterpiece. I watched The Manchurian Candidate over the weekend too, and loved that. The Train is excellent too.

[octagon]

Second should have been very much up my alley but it seemed very flat to me.

A creepy black-and-white, 60s Twilight Zoneish sci-fi conspiracy thriller by John Frankenheimer and James Wong Howe with a great character actor cast - take half of those things away and I still should have eaten this thing up.

But I dunno...maybe it will click for me the second time around.

[D2Girls]

Originally Posted by parklife

Ray Jackson, for some reason, the way you format your posts drives me batty.

...but it's okay.

hello fellow torontian and criterion lover
no creeper

[starman15317]

With the addition of Mulholland Drive to the collection, I thought it was time to update my Top 10 list.

https://www.criterion.com/lists/119700-my-top-10

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by octagon

Second should have been very much up my alley but it seemed very flat to me.

A creepy black-and-white, 60s Twilight Zoneish sci-fi conspiracy thriller by John Frankenheimer and James Wong Howe with a great character actor cast - take half of those things away and I still should have eaten this thing up.

But I dunno...maybe it will click for me the second time around.

I'd like to see it again, too. It was one of the first CC title I saw after hanging around this site. I responded generally well to it until I saw my next 20 or so CC films..... I felt it paled in comparison to many of them.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by parklife

Ray Jackson, for some reason, the way you format your posts drives me batty.

...but it's okay.

No offense taken.

...I respect your opinion.

[DaBargainHunta]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

No offense taken.

...I respect your opinion.

I've never noticed anything out of the ordinary about the formatting of Ray Jackson's posts. But that avatar...ugh. I'm sorry, Ray, but I hate it. (What is it from anyway? I've been wondering that for a while.) Then again, it does make you stand out in my mind, so I guess mission accomplished.

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

I've never noticed anything out of the ordinary about the formatting of Ray Jackson's posts. But that avatar...ugh. I'm sorry, Ray, but I hate it. (What is it from anyway? I've been wondering that for a while.) Then again, it does make you stand out in my mind, so I guess mission accomplished.

You are not alone in that sentiment, sorry

If you see Wild at Heart you will hate it even more.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by adamhopelies

I think it's his masterpiece. I watched The Manchurian Candidate over the weekend too, and loved that. The Train is excellent too.

Nice. I like Seconds a lot. Haven't seen Manchurian or Train yet, but picked them both up at the last Arrow sale so they're just sitting on the shelf waiting for me.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

I've never noticed anything out of the ordinary about the formatting of Ray Jackson's posts. But that avatar...ugh. I'm sorry, Ray, but I hate it. (What is it from anyway? I've been wondering that for a while.) Then again, it does make you stand out in my mind, so I guess mission accomplished.

"But that avatar...ugh. I'm sorry, Ray, but I hate it. (What is it from anyway? I've been wondering that for a while"

Senior yearbook photo - South Eugene High class of 1993.

The photographer they hired is now in prison for real estate fraud.

...true story.

[Bob Kramer]

Seconds is very good, but flawed. Perhaps because it's a Hollywood film? Compared to similarly themed films like Face Of Another or Eyes Without A Face, I think it suffers. It really is as slight and parablistic as an episode of The Twilight Zone.

It was very well crafted, in Frankenheimer's usual heavy-handed way (he seems Oliver Stone's antecedent) but despite that care I thought there were problems in the story's logic and construction. One aspect that is admittedly subjective but bothered me the most is

[Show spoiler]after he gets his new life and the opportunity to be with whomever he wants, he immediately hitches himself to a butt-ugly woman who looks like a 40 year old basset hound. He could have chosen anyone or any number of beautiful young women, but... this? The only reason I can see this justified is that she is revealed to be part of "The Organization" as well, and that his new life really isn't any freer than his old one. I appreciate that cynicism, but still, that's pretty trite. Sort of The Man In The Man In the Grey Flannel Suit.

[CriterionBlues]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

Nice. I like Seconds a lot. Haven't seen Manchurian or Train yet, but picked them both up at the last Arrow sale so they're just sitting on the shelf waiting for me.

Seven Days in May is also quite good. I'm with Adam, love The Train. The Manchurian Candidate is good as well, but probably my least favorite of that era in his career, which is saying something.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Bob Kramer

Seconds is very good, but flawed. Perhaps because it's a Hollywood film? Compared to similarly themed films like Face Of Another or Eyes Without A Face, I think it suffers. It really is as slight and parablistic as an episode of The Twilight Zone.

It was very well crafted, in Frankenheimer's usual heavy-handed way (he seems Oliver Stone's antecedent) but despite that care I thought there were problems in the story's logic and construction. One aspect that is admittedly subjective but bothered me the most is

[Show spoiler]after he gets his new life and the opportunity to be with whomever he wants, he immediately hitches himself to a butt-ugly woman who looks like a 40 year old basset hound. He could have chosen anyone or any number of beautiful young women, but... this? The only reason I can see this justified is that she is revealed to be part of "The Organization" as well, and that his new life really isn't any freer than his old one. I appreciate that cynicism, but still, that's pretty trite. Sort of The Man In The Man In the Grey Flannel Suit.

the actress you are so critical of was 31 in 1966, the year in which Seconds was released. and I can't tell if you're insinuating that Twilight Zone is anything less than brilliant... if you are, well then I guess that is par for the course for you... 9 out of 10 posts you make here are negative.

its okay to be "on an island" with an opinion, but it seems that your sole intention is to be a crap stir.

people here don't tell each other "up yours" either, so take notice that that type of behavior will get you suspended and maybe even banned. so we all have that to look forward to.