The Criterion Collection

[mja345]

"The Baby" was released by Severin a couple years ago, so you have to think Criterion was simply beat to the punch.

I think Criterion should focus on releasing the two pregnant man films. 1978's "Rabbit Test" with Billy Crystal and of course "Junior" with Schwarzenegger.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by Helikaon

Patience? The Turin Horse requires patience.

Yes The Turin Horse definitely requires patience. I was speaking more from my own opinion of Django. On my first viewing I found it a little slow and about 20 minutes too long but when I watched it more I began to like it more. I still think it's 20 minutes too long though. I've also had friends that had a different expectation of Django. They thought it was going to be more of an action style Western instead of a "Southern" as Tarantino calls it. Of course there are slower films than Django but that doesn't mean people won't find Django slow as well.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Because they're too busy releasing Wes Anderson and preparing for Sixteen Candles.

I can accept Sixteen Candles.

The panty scene alone makes it Criterion worthy.

But Wes Anderson is the reason I became an alcoholic.

...that I cannot accept.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by mja345

"The Baby" was released by Severin a couple years ago, so you have to think Criterion was simply beat to the punch.

I think Criterion should focus on releasing the two pregnant man films. 1978's "Rabbit Test" with Billy Crystal and of course "Junior" with Schwarzenegger.

The Baby is the first legitimate cinematic allegory for the impact of the Vietnam War on American society.

Don't compare it to some goofy Joan Rivers' comedy about a man who gets pregnant.

...it's disrespectful.

Jean Claude stays with me.

[cakefactory]

Originally Posted by mja345

"The Baby" was released by Severin a couple years ago, so you have to think Criterion was simply beat to the punch.

Yeah. I wasn't sure if Ray was unaware it was already on Blu-Ray, or if he thinks Criterion needs to revisit it. If the latter, then we'll go with "Severin would never allow anyone else to release it, since they're making millions of dollars off of its sales."

I'm surprised to see Donnie Darko discussion. The guy that mentions it along with Boondock Saints as staples of college kid "favorite movies" sections of early Facebook is DEAD ON. EVERYONE loved those and put posters of them up in college when I was there (started in 2002). I saw Donnie Darko when I was in high school and naturally I thought it was total genius and it was one of my favorite movies. I haven't seen it since about 2004 and I'm kind of scared to, TBH. I know to avoid the director's cut, but I'm kind of worried the regular version will also just be a slightly embarrassing movie for emo high school kids. I mean, I definitely remember thinking his slightly gothy girlfriend was the hottest in the world, which of course probably added to my opinion of it, while I think at this point I'd be like "wow she's just a little kid!!!" Even back then, I remember thinking Drew Barrymore's inclusion was groan-worthy. So, who knows. I'm scared to revisit it. I have listened to the composed part of the soundtrack many times over the years, and that's still good. The instrumental piano stuff, I mean. And I love that creepy vocal thing from the scene in the theater.

I still haven't watched Boondock Saints, and I still tend to use it as a way to put people who consider it a favorite movie into a category of lowbrow film fans, which I probably shouldn't do. It might be fine, it might be possible to love it and not also be a dullard. I did a similar thing with Legally Blonde for a while (helped by that Office episode where someone lists it as a favorite movie and that is intended to define her character as being an idiot), and ended up loving it when I finally watched it, so...who knows. Maybe I'M just an idiot.

I think I'm going to get around to watching the Before trilogy on blu-ray this week. I saw them for the first time a year or two ago and was blown away by the first, loved the second almost as much (and thought the ending was way better than anything in the first), and HATED the third. Now that the surprise is gone, I'm guessing I'll be able to appreciate the third much more.

[nitin]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

Yeah. I wasn't sure if Ray was unaware it was already on Blu-Ray, or if he thinks Criterion needs to revisit it. If the latter, then we'll go with "Severin would never allow anyone else to release it, since they're making millions of dollars off of its sales."

I'm surprised to see Donnie Darko discussion. The guy that mentions it along with Boondock Saints as staples of college kid "favorite movies" sections of early Facebook is DEAD ON. EVERYONE loved those and put posters of them up in college when I was there (started in 2002). I saw Donnie Darko when I was in high school and naturally I thought it was total genius and it was one of my favorite movies. I haven't seen it since about 2004 and I'm kind of scared to, TBH. I know to avoid the director's cut, but I'm kind of worried the regular version will also just be a slightly embarrassing movie for emo high school kids. I mean, I definitely remember thinking his slightly gothy girlfriend was the hottest in the world, which of course probably added to my opinion of it, while I think at this point I'd be like "wow she's just a little kid!!!" Even back then, I remember thinking Drew Barrymore's inclusion was groan-worthy. So, who knows. I'm scared to revisit it. I have listened to the composed part of the soundtrack many times over the years, and that's still good. The instrumental piano stuff, I mean. And I love that creepy vocal thing from the scene in the theater.

I still haven't watched Boondock Saints, and I still tend to use it as a way to put people who consider it a favorite movie into a category of lowbrow film fans, which I probably shouldn't do. It might be fine, it might be possible to love it and not also be a dullard. I did a similar thing with Legally Blonde for a while (helped by that Office episode where someone lists it as a favorite movie and that is intended to define her character as being an idiot), and ended up loving it when I finally watched it, so...who knows. Maybe I'M just an idiot.

I think I'm going to get around to watching the Before trilogy on blu-ray this week. I saw them for the first time a year or two ago and was blown away by the first, loved the second almost as much (and thought the ending was way better than anything in the first), and HATED the third. Now that the surprise is gone, I'm guessing I'll be able to appreciate the third much more.

Donnie Darko hold up well, it's just not the amazing life changing classic that you probably thought it was in college

[tisdivine]

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

Inglorious Basterds is a film where I felt like I was one of the only people who loved it oddly. I've known a lot of people who couldn't finish it too. I don't know. Maybe it's the subtitles. I think it rivals Pulp Fiction for Tarantino's masterpiece. A lot of the people I know that couldn't finish it are the type who love the fast quick cut action films of today though too. There's also a lot of people that I don't know except for the forums who aren't Tarantino fans as well as it was recently discussed on this thread.

Neon Demon isn't for everyone and while I do love Django I can understand why it may not be for everyone as well. That film does take patience to watch.

I'm with you on this on too. Inglorious Basterds is a great film. Jackie Brown is my fave Tarantino but I think thats just bc of my undying love for Pam Grier. Pulp Fiction is prob my fav Tarantino without Pam lol

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by tisdivine

I'm with you on this on too. Inglorious Basterds is a great film. Jackie Brown is my fave Tarantino but I think thats just bc of my undying love for Pam Grier. Pulp Fiction is prob my fav Tarantino without Pam lol

Jackie Brown is outstanding. Both because of the film and Pam Grier Lol. I really do love that film.

[SuperFlyHighGuy]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

The Baby is the first legitimate cinematic allegory for the impact of the Vietnam War on American society.

Don't compare it to some goofy Joan Rivers' comedy about a man who gets pregnant.

...it's disrespectful.

Jean Claude stays with me.

Interesting. I've seen the film 3 or 4 times but this analysis gives me another reason for a rewatch.

I've shown The Baby to a couple people and their opinion on my character was altered, I think.

[theater dreamer]

I loved Inglourious Basterds. Christoph Waltz was brilliant.

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

Inglorious Basterds is a film where I felt like I was one of the only people who loved it oddly. I've known a lot of people who couldn't finish it too. I don't know. Maybe it's the subtitles. I think it rivals Pulp Fiction for Tarantino's masterpiece. A lot of the people I know that couldn't finish it are the type who love the fast quick cut action films of today though too. There's also a lot of people that I don't know except for the forums who aren't Tarantino fans as well as it was recently discussed on this thread.

Neon Demon isn't for everyone and while I do love Django I can understand why it may not be for everyone as well. That film does take patience to watch.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

Yeah. I wasn't sure if Ray was unaware it was already on Blu-Ray, or if he thinks Criterion needs to revisit it. If the latter, then we'll go with "Severin would never allow anyone else to release it, since they're making millions of dollars off of its sales."

I'm surprised to see Donnie Darko discussion. The guy that mentions it along with Boondock Saints as staples of college kid "favorite movies" sections of early Facebook is DEAD ON. EVERYONE loved those and put posters of them up in college when I was there (started in 2002). I saw Donnie Darko when I was in high school and naturally I thought it was total genius and it was one of my favorite movies. I haven't seen it since about 2004 and I'm kind of scared to, TBH. I know to avoid the director's cut, but I'm kind of worried the regular version will also just be a slightly embarrassing movie for emo high school kids. I mean, I definitely remember thinking his slightly gothy girlfriend was the hottest in the world, which of course probably added to my opinion of it, while I think at this point I'd be like "wow she's just a little kid!!!" Even back then, I remember thinking Drew Barrymore's inclusion was groan-worthy. So, who knows. I'm scared to revisit it. I have listened to the composed part of the soundtrack many times over the years, and that's still good. The instrumental piano stuff, I mean. And I love that creepy vocal thing from the scene in the theater.

I still haven't watched Boondock Saints, and I still tend to use it as a way to put people who consider it a favorite movie into a category of lowbrow film fans, which I probably shouldn't do. It might be fine, it might be possible to love it and not also be a dullard. I did a similar thing with Legally Blonde for a while (helped by that Office episode where someone lists it as a favorite movie and that is intended to define her character as being an idiot), and ended up loving it when I finally watched it, so...who knows. Maybe I'M just an idiot.

I think I'm going to get around to watching the Before trilogy on blu-ray this week. I saw them for the first time a year or two ago and was blown away by the first, loved the second almost as much (and thought the ending was way better than anything in the first), and HATED the third. Now that the surprise is gone, I'm guessing I'll be able to appreciate the third much more.

I didn't see Donnie Darko for the first time until 2009 when I was almost 30 and then it took me a couple viewings to truly love it so I'd say you're safe watching it today. Also give the director's cut a shot. You've already seen the theatrical. Seems silly to just completely avoid the director's cut because it's fashionable.

[deepbreathsanddeath]

I'm not trying to dispel the consensus that My Own Private Idaho is one of Criterion's worst encoded Blu-ray Discs, because on first viewing it was impossible for me to ignore too, however has anybody here seen it on a 4K TV set? My first viewing was on 1080p and the compression artefacts were pretty horrible. I tested some of it on a 4K TV and to my surprise, the disc actually looks great. That harsh appearance was largely removed.

I don't really know what to make of that but thought I'd drop that observation off. If reviewers (such as Pro-B) have been viewing Criterion's on a 4K set up, it might explain why the disc got high marks for PQ while most of us (who probably haven't upgraded to 4K TV's yet) agreed that there was an obvious problem. I'm not sure what kind of sense that makes since it comes from a 4K scan but is presented in 1080p. Make of that what you will.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by deepbreathsanddeath

I'm not trying to dispel the consensus that My Own Private Idaho is one of Criterion's worst encoded Blu-ray Discs, because on first viewing it was impossible for me to ignore too, however has anybody here seen it on a 4K TV set? My first viewing was on 1080p and the compression artefacts were pretty horrible. I tested some of it on a 4K TV and to my surprise, the disc actually looks great. That harsh appearance was largely removed.

I don't really know what to make of that but thought I'd drop that observation off. If reviewers (such as Pro-B) have been viewing Criterion's on a 4K set up, it might explain why the disc got high marks for PQ while most of us (who probably haven't upgraded to 4K TV's yet) agreed that there was an obvious problem. I'm not sure what kind of sense that makes since it comes from a 4K scan but is presented in 1080p. Make of that what you will.

I'm going through my collection now and the difference I'm seeing is pretty dramatic. I'd add that my old tv was one of the first RPTV models that was a 1080 display so we're talking 2006.

[The Great Owl]

Donnie Darko is an okay movie, but it still chaps my tail that they didn't use the vastly superior original Tears For Fears version of "Mad World" for the soundtrack. The soundtrack is otherwise flawless, with Joy Division, The Church, Duran Duran, Echo and the Bunnymen, INXS, etc., but the agonizingly melodramatic tempo of the Gary Jules version of the Tears For Fear song is a black mark.

[cakefactory]

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

I didn't see Donnie Darko for the first time until 2009 when I was almost 30 and then it took me a couple viewings to truly love it so I'd say you're safe watching it today. Also give the director's cut a shot. You've already seen the theatrical. Seems silly to just completely avoid the director's cut because it's fashionable.

I've seen many reviews that say it's both very bad, and also contains explanations that retroactively ruin the original by explaining things in stupid ways that take away the mystery of the original. Sort of like how the director's cut of Cinema Paradiso means you now know exactly what happens and you can't view the original the same way again unless you get a memory wipe

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Donnie Darko is an okay movie, but it still chaps my tail that they didn't use the vastly superior original Tears For Fears version of "Mad World" for the soundtrack. The soundtrack is otherwise flawless, with Joy Division, The Church, Duran Duran, Echo and the Bunnymen, INXS, etc., but the agonizingly melodramatic tempo of the Gary Jules version of the Tears For Fear song is a black mark.

That version of Mad World fits entirely with the rest of the soundtrack, the piano playing is the same kind of sound as all the piano sound through the actual composed part of the score. Also, I was very confused when I eventually heard the TFF version and it was upbeat and happy sounding. The lyrics are the same, obviously, but if you listened to it without understanding english it would just sound like a happy song, unlike the Gary Jules version.

I'm guessing that unless you heard the TFF version first, you wouldn't think it belonged in the movie. Whether it's "superior" or not is kind of besides the point when they have radically different tones and sonics, and one fits perfectly with the mood and sound of the film's entire score and the other...definitely does not, plus given what happened just before the end credits, you definitely don't want upbeat. You have a dreamy, depressing ending and get a dreamy, depressing song, not some boopy 80s pop song. (and I really love some TFF songs, particularly Woman in Chains and Head Over Heels)

The only thing that bugs me about that song is how it's been overplayed and co-opted for all kinds of agonizingly stupid uses. The funniest was how it was used in a super-testosterone videogame, Gears of War 3, in a scene where some unrealistically musclebound character bites it. I almost started laughing when that song came on the soundtrack, but rapidly started physically cringing instead.

RE: the 4K stuff, I don't feel like that should be used as a defense of the disc - if your upscaling technology is removing the flaws of a disc, that seems more like it should be used as a selling point of whatever player/TV you're using!

[kuro_sawa]

Heads up for those of you who are region free and don't mind having some B locked Criterion titles, Amazon is having a sale on a handful of the UK releases at the moment for around $17 a pop. In A Lonely Place is under $15.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Donnie Darko is an okay movie, but it still chaps my tail that they didn't use the vastly superior original Tears For Fears version of "Mad World" for the soundtrack. The soundtrack is otherwise flawless, with Joy Division, The Church, Duran Duran, Echo and the Bunnymen, INXS, etc., but the agonizingly melodramatic tempo of the Gary Jules version of the Tears For Fear song is a black mark.

They got Gary Jules to do that version specifically for the films tone and themes, it wasn't made and then used I think it's perfect but it got so over used and over played it became annoying. I think had it only been used for film and not hyped up it wouldn't be so bad.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

I've seen many reviews that say it's both very bad, and also contains explanations that retroactively ruin the original by explaining things in stupid ways that take away the mystery of the original. Sort of like how the director's cut of Cinema Paradiso means you now know exactly what happens and you can't view the original the same way again unless you get a memory wipe



That version of Mad World fits entirely with the rest of the soundtrack, the piano playing is the same kind of sound as all the piano sound through the actual composed part of the score. Also, I was very confused when I eventually heard the TFF version and it was upbeat and happy sounding. The lyrics are the same, obviously, but if you listened to it without understanding english it would just sound like a happy song, unlike the Gary Jules version.

I'm guessing that unless you heard the TFF version first, you wouldn't think it belonged in the movie. Whether it's "superior" or not is kind of besides the point when they have radically different tones and sonics, and one fits perfectly with the mood and sound of the film's entire score and the other...definitely does not, plus given what happened just before the end credits, you definitely don't want upbeat. You have a dreamy, depressing ending and get a dreamy, depressing song, not some boopy 80s pop song.

The only thing that bugs me about that song is how it's been overplayed and co-opted for all kinds of agonizingly stupid uses. The funniest was how it was used in a super-testosterone videogame, Gears of War 3, in a scene where some unrealistically musclebound character bites it. I almost started laughing when that song came on the soundtrack, but rapidly started physically cringing instead.

RE: the 4K stuff, I don't feel like that should be used as a defense of the disc - if your upscaling technology is removing the flaws of a disc, that seems more like it should be used as a selling point of whatever player/TV you're using!

Don't believe it I tell you!

It really is great. It adds more character depth. I've watched both versions and I found both to still be ambiguous as hell not really knowing what's going on. It takes it to a little bit of a different direction and I think that's where the confusion is with the added stuff hand-feeding the audience. Frankly I honestly can't answer if I would still love Donnie Darko just as much if the director's cut didn't exist. The changes in music are the biggest problem for fans I believe. If it had the same music as the theatrical I'm really curious what the consensus would be. Im one who prefers the director's cut though (to every film that has one). I really do believe people will find the director's cut enjoyable if they can get past the music changes. I also believe if Kelly hadn't felt forced to make the cuts and the theatrical never existed the director's cut would be widely praised. That can go for any extended/unrated/director's cut though.

I haven't seen Cinema Paradise but I'm at the point where I've put it off for way too long because I keep hearing great things about it. I'll check out both versions.

[kuro_sawa]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

They got Gary Jules to do that version specifically for the films tone and themes, it wasn't made and then used I think it's perfect but it got so over used and over played it became annoying. I think had it only been used for film and not hyped up it wouldn't be so bad.

The only thing off putting about that sequence to me is that it is pretty much a rip off of Kieslowski's end sequence in Blue. I'm not sure if Kelly had seen the film prior or if perhaps it is Coppola's hand, but if you watch both the similarity is undeniable. I actually like the original cut of Donnie Darko quite a bit for what it is, and it's sort of a let down that Kelly hasn't made anything of interest to me since. His subsequent films and that directors cut definitely soured his name a bit.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by kuro_sawa

The only thing off putting about that sequence to me is that it is pretty much a rip off of Kieslowski's end sequence in Blue. I'm not sure if Kelly had seen the film prior or if perhaps it is Coppola's hand, but if you watch both the similarity is undeniable. I actually like the original cut of Donnie Darko quite a bit for what it is, and it's sort of a let down that Kelly hasn't made anything of interest to me since. His subsequent films and that directors cut definitely soured his name a bit.

It's possible it's an homage to that film. Quite a bit of films do that.