The Criterion Collection

[Akibiyori]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I rarely watch the closet picks by "celebrities" at Criterion, but for whatever reason I watched filmmaker Mary Harron a few days ago. I don't know what's sadder, her taking mostly DVDs or her not having these supposed "favorite" movies already.

Not everyone is a collector and not everyone is a videophile. Even fewer people are both.

[Ishai]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I know how those videos work, they are a commercial and done more for entertainment purposes than educational ones. I would love to see what titles some of these people would choose once the cameras are turned off.

[Show spoiler]
As to your latter point, it's because I would hope these professional filmmakers were aware of the differences between DVD and Blu and be knowledgeable about the formats. If the filmmakers themselves don't understand the best methods for consumers to experience their art at home then I stand by my post that it strikes me as sad. If I directed movies I wouldn't assume everyone was going to see them in a theater and I would take the time and make the effort to understand the choices my potential audiences have if they don't go to a cinema. It's also a concern for the future of physical media when an industry representative does not champion the superior technology. It could be seen as a discouraging idea to those just starting to explore home cinema, e.g. "Well, she directs movies so if she chooses DVDs then there must be no benefit to spending more money on Blu-ray or 4K." Not everyone reads these forums or understands the intricacies of the technology so these advertisements from Criterion could send out some mixed signals.

Let me ask you this: If Martin Scorsese or Christopher Nolan walked out of that closet with all DVDs wouldn't you feel disappointed by their ignorance and frustrated by the message others might get from it? Joe Walmart doesn't need any more encouragement to keep diving in the DVD dump bin.

What really makes me sad is your post and that from the other dude who seem more inclined to rush out a defense for a celebrity and Criterion than to champion educated consumers and prosperity for the superior technology. This forum overflows with folks complaining about the idiocy of consumers who continue to help DVDs outsell Blu-rays every week. But you guys seem more concerned that I criticized a celebrity and God forbid Criterion too! Relax, it's not a mortal sin to find fault with Criterion, despite the overwhelming majority of folks who post in this thread claiming it is. Seeing someone of stature in the industry choosing a proven inferior format should not be defended, especially on this site! They should know better and you should know better too.

Now that's a sad question.

Since you asked, no, I wouldn't care if Scorsese or Nolan walked out with DVDs. It was more surprising that Nolan "I shoot on film and lie about using VFX because digital is bad" even mentioned BD and 4K in a recent video.

And no, I don't care that it's celebrities. Most of the people visiting that closet aren't really celebrities (most people won't know who they are) and none of them need protection from random people on a forum.

There are a lot of filmmakers who aren't interested in home media and criticizing them because they didn't pick the better format is just silly. Who cares?

There are a lot of people who enjoy watching DVDs, you should stop being a gatekeeper.

[TheBluRayBandito]

I didn't know After Hours is a Scorsese film. I woulda bought it during the sale if I knew.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I know how those videos work, they are a commercial and done more for entertainment purposes than educational ones. I would love to see what titles some of these people would choose once the cameras are turned off.

As to your latter point, it's because I would hope these professional filmmakers were aware of the differences between DVD and Blu and be knowledgeable about the formats. If the filmmakers themselves don't understand the best methods for consumers to experience their art at home then I stand by my post that it strikes me as sad. If I directed movies I wouldn't assume everyone was going to see them in a theater and I would take the time and make the effort to understand the choices my potential audiences have if they don't go to a cinema. It's also a concern for the future of physical media when an industry representative does not champion the superior technology. It could be seen as a discouraging idea to those just starting to explore home cinema, e.g. "Well, she directs movies so if she chooses DVDs then there must be no benefit to spending more money on Blu-ray or 4K." Not everyone reads these forums or understands the intricacies of the technology so these advertisements from Criterion could send out some mixed signals.

Let me ask you this: If Martin Scorsese or Christopher Nolan walked out of that closet with all DVDs wouldn't you feel disappointed by their ignorance and frustrated by the message others might get from it? Joe Walmart doesn't need any more encouragement to keep diving in the DVD dump bin.

What really makes me sad is your post and that from the other dude who seem more inclined to rush out a defense for a celebrity and Criterion than to champion educated consumers and prosperity for the superior technology. This forum overflows with folks complaining about the idiocy of consumers who continue to help DVDs outsell Blu-rays every week. But you guys seem more concerned that I criticized a celebrity and God forbid Criterion too! Relax, it's not a mortal sin to find fault with Criterion, despite the overwhelming majority of folks who post in this thread claiming it is. Seeing someone of stature in the industry choosing a proven inferior format should not be defended, especially on this site! They should know better and you should know better too.



Now that's a sad question.

2 of the 6 she selected were Blu-ray (Lost Highway being a 4K/BD combo in fact). One of her selections, Mala Noche, was only released on DVD, and another The Killing of a Chinese Bookie was only released individually on DVD, so she had no choice but to select that.

[hallospaceboy]

In all the discussion about whether a filmmaker should highlight a blu over a dvd, Quentin Tarantino is out there on his Video Archives podcast telling everyone how VHS is the superior home video format in his eyes because its closest to looking like film for him.


I love him, but no, he is dead wrong, lol.

[Gigantic Gene]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I rarely watch the closet picks by "celebrities" at Criterion, but for whatever reason I watched filmmaker Mary Harron a few days ago. I don't know what's sadder, her taking mostly DVDs or her not having these supposed "favorite" movies already.

No matter the medium, some artists don't spend a lot of time with other people's work. I don't judge their methods. There's an artist I know that I sent a BD to just a few years ago and later they told me they don't have a BD player. Which gave me a laugh because this year they had a Criterion Closet video and I watched them grab BDs. lol.

[Taylor3978]

Originally Posted by Reddington

RIP William Friedkin. An immense talent.

Love his Criterion Top 10:

https://www.criterion.com/current/to...edkin-s-top-10

You can see all those directors in the late 60s and early 70s (Friedkin, Scorsese, even Haskell Wexler in Medium Cool) just living and breathing the influence of the French New Wave. Just look at the press conference given by the French journalist on arrival in NYC in The French Connection, an obvious homage to the press conference in Breathless. The high point in American film-making.

[Taylor3978]

Originally Posted by hallospaceboy

Quentin Tarantino is out there on his Video Archives podcast telling everyone how VHS is the superior home video format in his eyes because its closest to looking like film for him.

I love Tarantino for his films and his love of cult films of the 1970s, but man he can be a real contrarian pseud sometimes. I remember him in an interview with Elvis Mitchell dissing John Huston. So Mitchell starts listing off Huston films. Maltese Falcon. "Yeah, that was good." Treasure of the Sierra Madre. "Yeah, that was good too." Asphalt Jungle. And so on.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by Taylor3978

I love Tarantino for his films and his love of cult films of the 1970s, but man he can be a real contrarian pseud sometimes. I remember him in an interview with Elvis Mitchell dissing John Huston. So Mitchell starts listing off Huston films. Maltese Falcon. "Yeah, that was good." Treasure of the Sierra Madre. "Yeah, that was good too." Asphalt Jungle. And so on.

And didn’t he say the entire decade of 1950’s cinema was worthless? He knows his acolytes breathlessly hang on his every word so like most demagogues he wants to see how much he can get away with. He also loves the spotlight it brings him. Rather than influencing his cult following to abjectly reject an entire period of film history why not inspire them to explore it for themselves? Blanket rejections tend not to be a good thing in the long run.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by Ishai

you should stop being a gatekeeper.

Cura te ipsum.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

2 of the 6 she selected were Blu-ray (Lost Highway being a 4K/BD combo in fact). One of her selections, Mala Noche, was only released on DVD, and another The Killing of a Chinese Bookie was only released individually on DVD, so she had no choice but to select that.

Thanks for the clarification!

Now that’s what I call an intelligent and productive rebuttal. As always from the great MifuneFan!

[KrugerIndustrial]

I love the films, and that is what really matters, but the packaging quality of these new 4K digipack releases is appalling considering the prices. The cardboard is flimsy as heck! Especially on Ranown, Three Colors, and Citizen Kane. Everything arrives crushed. Arrow, Indicator, and Radiance's releases have a much more premium feel; I have never had any issues with them.

[Taylor3978]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

And didn’t he say the entire decade of 1950’s cinema was worthless?

Let's just pick 1957:

12 Angry Men
Paths of Glory
Sweet Smell of Success
Witness for the Prosecution
The Bridge on the River Kwai
A Face in the Crowd
Curse of the Demon
3:10 to Yuma
Incredible Shrinking Man
Spirit of St Louis
Jailhouse Rock
What's Opera Doc?

How about 1955?

Night of the Hunter
Rebel Without a Cause
Marty
Kiss Me Deadly
Bad Day at Black Rock
All That Heaven Allows
One Froggy Evening
The Man From Laramie
The Man With The Golden Arm
Killer's Kiss
This Island Earth
Love Me or Leave Me

Compared to today, the 1950s was a Golden Age and now we live in the wasteland.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by Taylor3978

Let's just pick 1957:
Compared to today, the 1950s was a Golden Age and now we live in the wasteland.

The entire overkill global media responds to that statement with one word: BARBIEHEIMER!

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by Taylor3978

I love Tarantino for his films and his love of cult films of the 1970s, but man he can be a real contrarian pseud sometimes. I remember him in an interview with Elvis Mitchell dissing John Huston. So Mitchell starts listing off Huston films. Maltese Falcon. "Yeah, that was good." Treasure of the Sierra Madre. "Yeah, that was good too." Asphalt Jungle. And so on.

I love and respect QT...nobody I'd rather talk film with than him.

But like you said, his area of expertise is really spaghetti westerns, blaxploitation and low-budget grindhouse from the 60s and 70s. I've not been impressed when I've heard him critique earlier films/decades.

As somebody else said, he dismissed the entire 50s (my favorite decade), calling it the worst decade for cinema because of the Production Code...while praising the 40s for not having the same strictures and morality in place . His precise reasoning was "film noir and the war", while overlooking that film noir didn't really take off until after the war ended and flourished in the 50s. You didn't see the darker, subversive films of Hitchcock, Preminger, Ray and Mann until the 50s hit.

He also concludes that

[Show spoiler]Grant putting his arm around Fontaine at the end of Suspicion was a creepy affirmation that the ending was a lie and he intended to kill her after all, which I don't agree with.

[Taylor3978]

If I had to give QT the benefit of the doubt, as someone who grew up with the cinema of the 1970s, when Hollywood finally cast off the Code, I imagine he sees the 1940s as a similarly dynamic time, when Hollywood was no longer strictly making feel-good movies because of the Depression. So he might regard the 1950s as the decade when people like Huston to some extent were running out of steam and no longer firing on all cylinders.

But I'm pretty sure he is only dismissing the 1950s to be provocative. Surely Douglas Sirk's melodramas are the archetypal 1950s mainstream fare, but in the same interview with Elvis Mitchell referenced above, he is speaking approvingly of some of the things Sirk does in those films. I'm sure he has a high opinion of many of the films listed above, probably some films that would surprise people.

I don't agree at all that he only knows cult films from the 1970s. That may be his own nostalgia sweet spot, but I've heard him speak knowledgeably on a broad swathe of films. I just think he is being a contrarian for the sake of being provocative. Contrarians think they're impressing people by being provocative, when they just come across as half-baked and pretentious.

But I still love his films. Jackie Browne may be the best film of the 1990s.

[bonehica]

Originally Posted by Taylor3978

Let's just pick 1957:

[Show spoiler]12 Angry Men
Paths of Glory
Sweet Smell of Success
Witness for the Prosecution
The Bridge on the River Kwai
A Face in the Crowd
Curse of the Demon
3:10 to Yuma
Incredible Shrinking Man
Spirit of St Louis
Jailhouse Rock
What's Opera Doc?

How about 1955?

[Show spoiler]
Night of the Hunter
Rebel Without a Cause
Marty
Kiss Me Deadly
Bad Day at Black Rock
All That Heaven Allows
One Froggy Evening
The Man From Laramie
The Man With The Golden Arm
Killer's Kiss
This Island Earth
Love Me or Leave Me

Compared to today, the 1950s was a Golden Age and now we live in the wasteland.

I'm a '59 guy myself

The 400 Blows
Some Like it Hot
North by Northwest
Rio Bravo
Pickpocket
Hiroshima mon amour
Imitation of Life
The World of Apu
Shadows
Ben-Hur
Kaagaz Ke Phool
Good Morning
Anatomy of a Murder
Floating Weeds
Letter Never Sent
Ride Lonesome
Odds Against Tomorrow

[Taylor3978]

Here is at least part of the interview I was referring to.

Elvis Mitchell: Under The Influence - Quentin Tarantino (2008-07-28) - YouTube

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by Taylor3978

If I had to give QT the benefit of the doubt, as someone who grew up with the cinema of the 1970s, when Hollywood finally cast off the Code, I imagine he sees the 1940s as a similarly dynamic time, when Hollywood was no longer strictly making feel-good movies because of the Depression.

I can agree with that.

I don't agree at all that he only knows cult films from the 1970s.

I didn't say that's all he knows, but it is, as you put it, his "nostalgic sweet spot", or niche. Going back to his film noir example, there were no darker or cynical noir films than Ace in the Hole, Kiss Me Deadly and Touch of Evil, and what decade were they from? And rather than condemn everything that came from that era, why not appreciate the artistry that in many cases was able to circumvent the hindrances and restrictions of the Code?

But I still love his films.

Same; own everything he's done and am eagerly looking forward to his purportedly last movie.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by bonehica

I'm a '59 guy myself

The 400 Blows
Some Like it Hot
North by Northwest
Rio Bravo
Pickpocket
Hiroshima mon amour
Imitation of Life
The World of Apu
Shadows
Ben-Hur
Kaagaz Ke Phool
Good Morning
Anatomy of a Murder
Floating Weeds
Letter Never Sent
Ride Lonesome
Odds Against Tomorrow

‘58 Guy here:

VERTIGO