The Criterion Collection

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

Oh, I forgot to mention this in my post. TCM showed the Three Colors trilogy very recently and I recorded all three. Are these films that can be a little divisive or have a more niche, very art house appeal? Or are they generally enjoyable by most people? I'm wondering if I should view them on my DVR first or just take the plunge and blind buy the Blu-ray set to view them in the best quality for the first time.

I enjoyed the heck out of the Three Colors Trilogy. The films are artistic, but they're also free of the confines of what most think of as "art house" cinema. They have a rhythm to them because of the variety in location settings and because of the character arcs.

[Ausjdm]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Added. Thanks!

Here is the updated list, folks.

What about Leaving Las Vegas on CC? Didn't the director say this on twitter or was that bull?

[jw007]

Hey, I watched Ali: Fear Eats the Soul last night for the first time. Wow, what a powerful melodrama. I was moved by the amount of prejudice and racism in the characters acting towards the interracial couple. The only other film I had seen of Fassbinder before this was the World On A Wire TV movie. But I felt like this was a very timely film especially today where there is more racism/xenophobia than ever in Europe. I was just visiting Germany in fact (Berlin and Munich) and this really reminded me of just how people in Germany seem to stare at foreigners/outsiders (I have relatives there though).

[jw007]

Here is my list of movies I want to buy during the 50% off sale in July:

Black Narcissus
If...
Rififi
A Brief History of Time
Breaking the Waves
Il Sorpasso
Like Someone in Love
The Life Aquatic
Picnic at Hanging Rock
La Vie de Boheme
King of the Hill
George Washington
The Freshman
The Great Beauty
A Hard Day's Night
Scanners
The Big Chill
Pickpocket
Insomnia

So that's about 19 titles there and most of them are new releases except for the first 2. All are blind buys except Insomnia, The Life Aquatic and Rififi. Is this wise having so many blind buys?

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by CMNPlanet

Todd Haynes' Safe was all but confirmed by Becker during the last Wexler talk.

Thank you, added!

Originally Posted by Ausjdm

What about Leaving Las Vegas on CC? Didn't the director say this on twitter or was that bull?

Ah, that's right.

He tweeted that he was talking to Criterion about a possible 20th anniversary edition. I'll post it under speculation.

Should I also post 25th Hour under speculation? I recall Spike Lee mentioning it on Twitter, although it has since been released on BD by Disney.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Thief
Rififi
Revanche
Three Colors
Days of Heaven
On the Waterfront

I absolutely love Blue is the Warmest Color, but I'd wait for the upcoming special edition.

If i were you I would buy the Artificial Eye release of Three colors (because it includes 5.0 audio) but I guess you have a Region A player?
because i think you won't be able to play the bonus content of the Artificial Eye.
On the other hand the Criterion has more extras.
It's a real dilemma for me..
More extras or 5.0 audio?

edit: oops, sorry. i was addressing to jlk5844

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Ah, that's right.

He tweeted that he was talking to Criterion about a possible 20th anniversary edition. I'll post it under speculation.

I do remember that as well. Leaving Las Vegas was a good movie, but I don't know if I'd buy it. I remember thinking while watching it that I never wanted to watch it again. One of the most depressing and emotionally disturbing movies I have ever seen. Nicolas Cage gives a fantastic performance.

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by jw007

Hey, I watched Ali: Fear Eats the Soul last night for the first time. Wow, what a powerful melodrama. I was moved by the amount of prejudice and racism in the characters acting towards the interracial couple. The only other film I had seen of Fassbinder before this was the World On A Wire TV movie. But I felt like this was a very timely film especially today where there is more racism/xenophobia than ever in Europe. I was just visiting Germany in fact (Berlin and Munich) and this really reminded me of just how people in Germany seem to stare at foreigners/outsiders (I have relatives there though).

What did you think of World on a Wire? I only just recently heard about this title.

[Member-167298]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I enjoyed the heck out of the Three Colors Trilogy. The films are artistic, but they're also free of the confines of what most think of as "art house" cinema. They have a rhythm to them because of the variety in location settings and because of the character arcs.

I think I have only seen the one with the music composer's widow. I remember really liking it a lot. Perhaps I will have to pick up the trilogy at some point.

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

If i were you I would buy the Artificial Eye release of Three colors (because it includes 5.0 audio) but I guess you have a Region A player?
because i think you won't be able to play the bonus content of the Artificial Eye.
On the other hand the Criterion has more extras.
It's a real dilemma for me..
More extras or 5.0 audio?

edit: oops, sorry. i was addressing to jlk5844

Yeah I'm only Region A. I'm aware of the issues that were brought up about Blue and White in the Criterion release but I'm not up to date, though they won't bother me having never seen them. I wonder what framing for Blue the TCM broadcast is.

Also, thanks for everyone's input on my list.

[the sordid sentinel]

Originally Posted by PrestonXI

I think I have only seen the one with the music composer's widow. I remember really liking it a lot. Perhaps I will have to pick up the trilogy at some point.

You will be glad you did. White is very good and Red is amazing. These are 3 of the best movies about life in general I have ever seen. Not the B.S., but the real stuff that matters most. I love the European setting. It reminds me that at the most basic level we are all pretty much alike, regardless of the culture we exist in.

[smoss469]

Originally Posted by the sordid sentinel

You will be glad you did. White is very good and Red is amazing. These are 3 of the best movies about life in general I have ever seen. Not the B.S., but the real stuff that matters most. I love the European setting. It reminds me that at the most basic level we are all pretty much alike, regardless of the culture we exist in.

I recorded them off TCM as well, I'm a bit apprehensive about watching them though as they're often considered art films which are VERY hit or miss IMO. However for a free view, they were worth recording. I hope to watch them in the next week or so.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

What did you think of World on a Wire? I only just recently heard about this title.

I watched it years ago when I first bought it on BD.... i remember it was sort of disjointed because I was watching a 2 part tv movie. Not a typical film by any means. The story/movie was very eccentric if that is the right term to use. For fans of sci fi though I recommend it. I just couldn't put my head around it. Might need to revisit it again sometime.

Does anyone else understand what World on a Wire is all about?

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by ultlife2013

Bluray.com states that 1.75 is the original aspect ratio of AHDN. Are they wrong then?

IMDb says (and you can take this with the usual grain of salt, since it's the IMDb):

1.75 : 1 (intended ratio)
1.85 : 1 (restored version)
1.37 : 1 (negative ratio)

The trouble with flat widescreen films is that there's no "correct" ratio other than what the director or cinematographer says it is. And even then, that's really just a reflection of what they protected the frame for.

Flat widescreen films are shot full aperture (which is why the "negative ratio" referred to above is 1.37:1), and printed the same. During projection, the intended ratio is accomplished by using what's called a mask fitted to the projector to matte off the unintended parts of the image.

The trouble is that the European standard for flat widescreen was 1.66:, whereas the American standard was 1.85:1. So a given film, regardless of which side of the pond it originated from, would likely be projected in both ratios, depending on which side of the pond is was being shown in.

Some filmmakers and studios preferred 1.75:1 (Disney is one), but whether the films were actually projected in that ratio would've depended on whether any given projectionist gave a rat's ass how the studio wanted it projected.

It wouldn't surprise me if Richard Lester wanted AHDN projected in a 1.75:1 ratio, but I've no idea if the film was ever actually projected that way.

[Egbert Souse]

A Hard Day's Night was originally released with instructions to show at 1.75:1, but probably played in the US at 1.85:1 more likely.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by javi92

I think Criterion has indulged a few directors lately in letting them revise aspects of their films. The 1.75 framing for Hard Day's Night and the color timing of Scanners are two recent examples that come to mind. Not to say I disagree with either of those, but it should bring up a debate about whether the director should have final say on these matters, especially years after the work was composed.

Depends. To be honest, I tend to side with the directors. They are the artists who oversee all aspects of the production, and get the last say in how it looks (until the studio decides to overrule them, anyway). I have little patience with people who insist that everything has to be exactly the way it was when they first saw a given film, though I understand that their point of view.

I find that most people only side with the directors when it matches their own desires. People who revere Stanley Kubrick still got pïssed off when he insisted that most of his films be transferred in Academy Ratio (or damn close to it) on home video.

Where it starts getting tricky is when the director wants to alter not just the presentation of the film, but the content. I don't mind if a director wants to alter his film after the fact, as long as the original version continues to be available. That's one of the reasons I admire Ridley Scott and Warner Bros for putting out the Blade Runner set with five different cuts of the film. Scott quite frankly says of the original cut, "I don't like this version, but a lot of people do, so here it is...enjoy".

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by octagon

The c-word isn't really appropriate here. I know people talk of self-censorship but that's kind of an oxymoron that devalues the word.

A director modifying his own work can be a lot of things but it's rarely (if ever) censorship.. And in this particular case he's really not even modifying his work...it's more like he's trying to preempt modifications.

Strictly speaking, you're right. It's not censorship. "Censorship" only applies when it's the State suppressing something. If a country's government (in the form of an agency or bureau or law) said that Lynch couldn't show unblurred nudity, that would be censorship. If Lynch himself (or even the studio distributing his film) decides that the film can't be released with unblurred nudity, it's not censorship.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

I do remember that as well. Leaving Las Vegas was a good movie, but I don't know if I'd buy it. I remember thinking while watching it that I never wanted to watch it again. One of the most depressing and emotionally disturbing movies I have ever seen. Nicolas Cage gives a fantastic performance.

It's one of a very few movies I've seen where I feel entitled to say, "It's one of the best movies I've ever seen, and I hope to God I never see it again."

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by jw007

I watched it years ago when I first bought it on BD.... i remember it was sort of disjointed because I was watching a 2 part tv movie. Not a typical film by any means. The story/movie was very eccentric if that is the right term to use. For fans of sci fi though I recommend it. I just couldn't put my head around it. Might need to revisit it again sometime.

Does anyone else understand what World on a Wire is all about?

It's a nested virtual reality scenario. The same source novel (Simulacron-3 by Daniel Galouye) was adapted a second time in 1999 as The Thirteenth Floor. Fassbinder's version is a touch more surreal.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by jayembee

IMDb says (and you can take this with the usual grain of salt, since it's the IMDb):

1.75 : 1 (intended ratio)
1.85 : 1 (restored version)
1.37 : 1 (negative ratio)

The trouble with flat widescreen films is that there's no "correct" ratio other than what the director or cinematographer says it is. And even then, that's really just a reflection of what they protected the frame for.

Flat widescreen films are shot full aperture (which is why the "negative ratio" referred to above is 1.37:1), and printed the same. During projection, the intended ratio is accomplished by using what's called a mask fitted to the projector to matte off the unintended parts of the image.

The trouble is that the European standard for flat widescreen was 1.66:, whereas the American standard was 1.85:1. So a given film, regardless of which side of the pond it originated from, would likely be projected in both ratios, depending on which side of the pond is was being shown in.

Some filmmakers and studios preferred 1.75:1 (Disney is one), but whether the films were actually projected in that ratio would've depended on whether any given projectionist gave a rat's ass how the studio wanted it projected.

It wouldn't surprise me if Richard Lester wanted AHDN projected in a 1.75:1 ratio, but I've no idea if the film was ever actually projected that way.

Here's a frame of the leader to one reel indicating the 1.75 aspect ratio:



It and other British films in the 50s and 60s were largely framed to be shown at 1.75, but still look good between 1.65 and 1.85.

More information, including copies of original trade magazines and studio memos can be found at http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/wi...-documentation about the various widescreen ratios.