The Criterion Collection

[drbikeshorts]

Originally Posted by GenPion

The Sophia Loren films in the KINO collection are some of my favorites -- all from the brilliant filmmaker Vittorio De Sica. Marcello Mastroianni also gives great performances in each film. I like to think of them as being the work resulting from these three greats: Loren, Mastroianni, De Sica. Sophia Loren is at the center -- and she's a brilliant actress in each of these roles-- but these films have greatness all around them.

If you are a fan of some of the Italian films (or De Sica films) in the Criterion Collection, I'd imagine that these films would also worth your time. They are beautiful examples of film-making.

I'll take this recommendation as well - cheers!

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

You CAN'T put on a film and half-watch it while dinking around on the net. Give it your attention or don't bother. Why are you here posting about a film you're 15 minutes into supposedly watching?!? ****'s sake, man.

Whoa bro. I had it on pause and I made a post when I peed lol.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by Cinemach

That's the place to start with Lynch books. When embarking on critical readings of any director/auteur, direct interviews or writings like this are a great place to begin, before moving onto second- or third-party critical interpretations.



A masterful depiction of the nightmare and fear manifest. Yet at the end, turns out to be nothing at all...

I might pick up a used copy for $11 on Amazon. I'm not sure if I've read it, but it seems like a book worth owning as I revisit his films frequently.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

I haven't formally written anything about it (yet---though I'd love to write about films somewhere, but always talk myself out of it).

I think that the social commentary works, but isn't even really necessary. The first time I was watching it I tried to understand/read about it so that I could feel 'caught up' with all the metaphors it presented, but I gave up doing that because I was so glued to the film itself. I can't think of many films that had the same effect on me as Salo did the first time I saw it. I couldn't take my eyes off it..... I felt such a wide variety of changing emotions throughout it..all together, it's just such a lasting experience that doesn't come around much, to me...and that alone makes it stand out considerably. I'm usually impressed when a film can make the viewer feel a similar frustration as that which the film itself is displaying...and on that subject of evil in Antichrist, I don't see a better example of a film allowing a viewer to reflect on the nature of it than Salo, either.

I'd agree--it's not something you can re-watch much. I've seen it only a couple times, and I feel like the effect of that, too, wears off after so many viewings.

For about two months after seeing it, I took a very moralistic stance on violence in cinema. 'does ______ have something to impart on the nature of evil, the allure of sadism,,,, or is it just appealing to the lowest common denominator. Related: It's going to be absolute torture on Monday night when I have to watch A Good Day to Die Hard.

A film I do feel asks those big questions is The Thin Red Line, in fact it may be the most anti-War film ever made...Scratch that, without a doubt it's the most Anti-War film ever made.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

I haven't formally written anything about it (yet---though I'd love to write about films somewhere, but always talk myself out of it).

I think that the social commentary works, but isn't even really necessary. The first time I was watching it I tried to understand/read about it so that I could feel 'caught up' with all the metaphors it presented, but I gave up doing that because I was so glued to the film itself. I can't think of many films that had the same effect on me as Salo did the first time I saw it. I couldn't take my eyes off it..... I felt such a wide variety of changing emotions throughout it..all together, it's just such a lasting experience that doesn't come around much, to me...and that alone makes it stand out considerably. I'm usually impressed when a film can make the viewer feel a similar frustration as that which the film itself is displaying...and on that subject of evil in Antichrist, I don't see a better example of a film allowing a viewer to reflect on the nature of it than Salo, either.

I'd agree--it's not something you can re-watch much. I've seen it only a couple times, and I feel like the effect of that, too, wears off after so many viewings.

You should post user reviews!

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I love Last Year At Marienbad, but I won't even pretend to say that I understand it. It's such an eerily gorgeous work of cinema that I want to see on a theater screen one day.

With many films of this sort, I simply put my brain on autopilot and let the film steer me where it wants me to go, instead of the other way around. Like Fellini's 8 1/2, Last Year At Marienbad is a film that I want to pause at random just to take in the full detail of various still frames.

It is fun to kick explanations back and forth after the fact, though.

[Show spoiler]Are the characters ghosts who are repeating moments for eternity?
Is the movie an interpretation of the Orpheus and Eurydice myth?
Is the woman reliving a murder or rape to come to terms with trauma?
Is the woman's husband imagining multiple interactions between his wife and the other man out of jealousy or insecurity?

It's all good.

I loved Criterion's recent post with the color stills from Last Year At Marienbad, although I would never want the film itself to be colorized.

I'm actually a lot more intrigued about finishing it today after reading this

[drbikeshorts]

Originally Posted by ElliesDad

About how you would expect a remake of High Noon to compare with the original. 3:10 to Yuma is a quintessential classic western, a true delight in the vein of High Noon. Nuanced performances, multi-dimensional value-driven characters, the drama provided by wonderfully written interaction between the protagonists, rather than endless gun fights, extraneous action, and distracting special effects, as in the remake.

Very surprised, and delighted, to see this as a Criterion announcement. That makes three easy purchases in two months (Badlands, Waterfront) and I'll also be looking at Life is Sweet.

Hey, I'm a fan of Peter Hyam's Outland
Having said that, I'm not really a fan of the remake of 3:10 to Yuma. I'll definitely consider getting the original.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Also, to commit blasphemy, I actually want the two Studio Ghibli films that are coming out this year in May, more than any of the Criterions coming out in May.

Not blasphemy at all. As much I love collecting and watching the movies in the Criterion Collection, Ghibli always gets top billing with me.

Sometimes I wonder what it would have been like if Criterion had gotten the US rights for Ghibli instead of Disney.

[drbikeshorts]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Whoa bro. I had it on pause and I made a post when I peed lol.

Unacceptable!
Next time wear a nappy!

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I've had everything I plan on ordering in my cart for a few days now

I even added the May titles in anticipation of a sale happening.

The sale might still happen, but it's always previously been limited to in stock items (no backorder or pre-order).

I know there have been glitches in the past (one year you were briefly able to order for 50% of the Criterion.com price, not 50% SRP), but i don't know if it's ever allowed pre-orders at the sale price.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by drbikeshorts

Unacceptable!
Next time wear a nappy!

I knew I should have

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

The sale might still happen, but it's always previously been limited to in stock items (no backorder or pre-order).

I know there have been glitches in the past (one year you were briefly able to order for 50% of the Criterion.com price, not 50% SRP), but i don't know if it's ever allowed pre-orders at the sale price.

Oh, I see. At least there's some hope still.

It's fine with me if they don't include pre-orders.

[The Great Owl]

Whenever I watch a particularly cerebral movie, I like to "chase it down" with a popcorn flick. That's how things roll in my collection, and why I love the John Hughes 80s movies, explosive action flicks, and such interspersed with the foreign movies or older films that rely on powerful imagery and dialogue.

This is why, after revisiting Gillo Pontecorvo's The Battle of Algiers on Thursday night and revisiting Federico Fellini's 8 1/2 last night, I'm planning to watch all four of the Bourne films back to back today.
Finished my run with the training group this morning, and it's supposed to get colder outside through the day, so no reservations about relaxing in my man cave to revisit four awesome action flicks.


(Refusing to admit that nonstop intensity of The Battle of Algiers is not far removed from a Bourne film)

[nekromantik]

My newest addition to my Criterion collection! (Not really a collection as I only have 5 now)

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Whenever I watch a particularly cerebral movie, I like to "chase it down" with a popcorn flick. That's how things roll in my collection, and why I love the John Hughes 80s movies, explosive action flicks, and such interspersed with the foreign movies or older films that rely on powerful imagery and dialogue.

This is why, after revisiting Gillo Pontecorvo's The Battle of Algiers on Thursday night and revisiting Federico Fellini's 8 1/2 last night, I'm planning to watch all four of the Bourne films back to back today.
Finished my run with the training group this morning, and it's supposed to get colder outside through the day, so no reservations about relaxing in my man cave to revisit four awesome action flicks.


(Refusing to admit that nonstop intensity of The Battle of Algiers is not far removed from a Bourne film)

(Gulp) I hope you're well stocked on "chems"

[R o d]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

A film I do feel asks those big questions is The Thin Red Line, in fact it may be the most anti-War film ever made...Scratch that, without a doubt it's the most Anti-War film ever made.

There are many great anti-war films including several in the CC. Grand Illusion, Paths of Glory, Burmese Harp, and the fine documentary Hearts and Minds come quickly to mind. But the best anti-war film in my opinion is The Americanization of Emily, directed by Arthur Hiller and starring James Garner and Julie Andrews. What I like about it is that it's not a morality tale that tries to lay a guilt trip on anyone or beat you over the head with shocking images. Rather, it's an intellectual film penned by the great Paddy Chayefsky that says the real problem is not war, but the glorification of war. Both Garner and Andrews say it's the best film they ever made.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

(Gulp) I hope you're well stocked on "chems"

Just some Diet Coke. That's how I roll.

A lot of my friends complain about motion sickness with the Bourne movies, but I never have that problem, and I never get tired of the car chases and the Paul Greengrass camera style. Then again, I've never seen the movies in the Blu-ray format before, so today will be a new experience.

If worse comes to worse, I can take a halftime break and watch 12 Angry Men.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

You CAN'T put on a film and half-watch it while dinking around on the net. Give it your attention or don't bother. Why are you here posting about a film you're 15 minutes into supposedly watching?!? ****'s sake, man.

Agreed. Marienbad is one film during which I don't eat nor do I take any breaks. I want to be hypnotized watching it. Resnais showed the ultimate form of respect to the viewer by not spoon-feeding us anything. It's all there and it's up to us watch it with an open, active mind.

IMO, the film is a work of art. There's nothing like it. One of my absolute favorites.

[Scottie]

I've been reading some different interpretations of Antichrist and I think it's quite interesting.

After taking them in, I've decided to give another interpretation of the film.

[Show spoiler]The film may not even strictly be about heaven or hell after all, but rather the evil that is found in human nature. I think one of the best examples in this entire movie is the name of the woods - Eden. In the Bible, this was the place where Adam and Eve were tempted by the devil, who was disguised as a snake. One could therefore argue that evil (the devil) exists in nature (the garden). When She talks about the woods as Satan's Playground, I feel that she is alluding to the Bible story, as well as other examples in past history. She may even be referring to the woods that the film takes place in having an effect on her (see below).

After She went to the woods to begin researching the concept of Gynocide, it took over her and she became obsessed with the idea that women are inherently evil. When she self-mutilates herself, this is her form of coping with her loss. She feels responsible for her son's death because she saw him leaving his crib and going downstairs, but her desire for sex got the best of her and she ultimately paid the consequence.

By taking He to the woods with her, I personally feel that She was trying to get to the bottom of the idea of Gynocide. As I already mentioned, she was trying to deal with the idea that women are inherently evil, and I partially feel that she was trying to get to the core of man's evilness, as well. This is demonstrated by her constantly asking He to hit her, among other things. She wanted the evil to come out inside of him, but it didn't until the very end in an act of self-defense / mental exhaustion.

One could also argue that by constantly engaging in sex with He, She was trying to mask her guilt and grief and get it off of her mind. I think the guilt wore her down so much, that she was worried by He leaving her. Therefore, she constantly abused him and she even bolted a weight to his leg to prevent him from escaping.

Did She actually resemble the Antichrist? In a way, she did. I'm not so sure now if she was truly possessed, but the obsession of Gynocide and the grief and guilt that was weighing on her mind ultimately had a negative effect on her and He.

I'm going to write a really nice review later and I will post the final version after.

[IronWaffle]

So, another thread got me remembering some memorable public screenings I've attended in recent years. I wrote about this here once, before the Great Crash of '12 erased most of my posts, but thought it worth sharing here. I'm also curious how others' perceptions of films they like or dislike may have been changed by seeing the film with an audience.

Several years ago I attended a Bergman retrospective several times over a month or so. On one of the days I saw Seventh Seal (Death, Plague, Chess, Catholicism, Witch hunts, etc.). It wasn't my first time seeing it, but it was the time that invigorated my love for it because its easily forgotten how genuinely funny some of its over-the-top humor is and how the chess scenes are peppered with dark humor arguably meant to elicit uncomfortable laughter. When you are alone (or perhaps in a classroom) and watching this "essential" "cornerstone" arthouse "classic" it's easy to see it is a dreary, overrated sophomoric movie with no entertainment value.

I've been lucky to catch my fair share of classic films in rerelease, but while all have been improved in terms of spectacle (I keep missing out on LoA, but I've caught many others either 70mm or Cinerama) Casablanca was different. I don't mean that in some melodramatic way, but in that unlike LoA it's a film arguably more about the dialogue and character than anything else. This meant a large room filled with laughter. It's easy to forget how funny a film like this is when watching alone at home or with a small group of people. it made me long to see Kane, which I also find to be quick witted despite so many understandably calling it dull.

Dialogue-driven films lose a lot with an audience of one, especially when the film is particularly old so the humor baked into drama is lost on the uninitiated.

Last year I had a similar experience with Rashomon, another film I've seen plenty of times. Just as Casablanca's wryly cynical humor and Seventh Seal's morbid humor were punctuated by audience response so too was this film's.

This is not true across the board, of course. Particularly I'm thinking of Bresson and Ozu's films, many of which I saw screened this past summer, where the audiences were generally mum throughout. No titters, no gasps, sighs or pins dropping. In fact, at these I noticed more people walking out mid-film, which I found to be a shame. Only two exceptions regarding these film makers sticks in my brain: a smattering of chuckles at one point during Balthasar and applause at the end of A Man Escaped. Even 2001, when I last saw it screened before a packed house at the AFI, garnered no response (even applause at the end!).

[rkish]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

My co-workers were asking me about it, and were surprised to find out that it was in colour, because of the cover. It was also amusing telling them the plot of the film, as there's about 30-40 years age difference between those co-workers and myself. Most of them are of an age to go to Narayama. It's all fun though, and they're a good bunch.

I always expect the Japanese releases to be good, and have yet to be disappointed by any of the ones I've watched. Mind you, I have avoided In the Realm of the Senses. And I don't mean to avoid Still Walking, but I'm unintentionally biased against it for being too "new." I know it's wrong to think that way, but it's unfortunate. I will get to it eventually!

I honestly haven't been watching a lot as of late, as I've been reading more. I've managed to dig up 1500 some odd ePubs for my Kobo, and kinda want to read all of them.

I wound up canceling my Amazon order of "Narayama" after Pro-B's warning about "the issue", but watched it on Hulu Plus this morning. For those w/o access to Hulu, I wholeheartedly recommend purchasing it. For those with access to Hulu...take the time and watch it here first. If you really enjoy it, you'll buy it anyway. I have a Roku box that has a "wired" Internet connection and the PQ was quite impressive...you won't be disappointed and it's a way to see it and buy it when you can/want to. I found out that I have a coup and my membership with B & N which will be cheaper than my initial Amazon order. I plan to buy it sometime this weekend.

I rented "Realm" and it didn't hit me like I wanted it to. I think Oshima films like that are an acquired taste.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Agreed. Marienbad is one film during which I don't eat nor do I take any breaks. I want to be hypnotized watching it. Resnais showed the ultimate form of respect to the viewer by not spoon-feeding us anything. It's all there and it's up to us watch it with an open, active mind.

I didn't get the impression he was posting WHILE watching Marienbad--
I sort of got the distinct feeling he was trying to watch it, gave it fifteen minutes, and gave up. Not an uncommon experience with this movie, I'm guessing.
(Oh, and to answer his original question: No, it's pretty much exactly like that for the whole slog.)