The Criterion Collection

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by iScottie

What version of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World do you folks prefer?

I watched the extended cut today and I enjoyed it, but can't help feel that it was extremely dragged out to the point where it went from fun to annoying.

Is the theatrical version better?

Not really. I first saw the film back in the 60s, and thought it was one of the most hilarious things I'd ever seen. The second time I saw it was in the 90s when I got it on laserdisc, and this time I felt as you did, that it was dragged out too long and ends up falling flat.

And I normally like Stanley Kramer. Then again, it's his dramas that I normally like.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I see you do not own Insignificance and Performance. While the latter can be pretty tough to get into, Insignificance is a real treat.

Re: Masque of Red Death. I do not remember it being that "otherworldly" looking. Maybe another viewing is in order.

Interesting. I felt the exact opposite about those two films. I immediately got into PERFORMANCE and found it intriguing throughout, but I never quite could go along with INSIGNIFICANCE and often found it pretentiously heavy-handed, even though still interesting and worth seeing. Should probably watch both again one of these nights.

As for MASQUE OF THE RED DEATH, arguably my favorite Corman (or at least Corman Poe film), thanks to Roeg's gorgeous color cinematography and the strong Ingmar Bergman influence, though I now like HOUSE OF USHER much better than I originally did decades ago, and it's also way up there.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by iScottie

What version of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World do you folks prefer?

I watched the extended cut today and I enjoyed it, but can't help feel that it was extremely dragged out to the point where it went from fun to annoying.

Is the theatrical version better?

To be frank even the theatrical version seems excessively dragged out to me. Seriously, the "Best Editing" award for this one is hugely mystifying. It seems quite obvious that a lot of scenes happen simply because so-and-so comedian was around for a scene. If you actually recognize those people and know their work, you might get a thrill out of it, but for newer viewers like me, it's a very "shrug" thing.

[The Great Owl]

There's a thread in the main forum asking about studio statistics in our collections. I took a quick look at my statistics, and was not surprised to see the Criterion makes a big dent in my collection.

24.9% Criterion
14.4% Warner Bros.
9.8% Olive Films
9.0% Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
7.6% 20th Century Fox
6.5% Twilight Time
6.3% Universal Studios
4.4% Paramount Pictures
3.5% Sony Pictures

If I had put just a little more effort into this month's sale, I could have filled in another 0.1%, but that's okay.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by iScottie

What version of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World do you folks prefer?

I watched the extended cut today and I enjoyed it, but can't help feel that it was extremely dragged out to the point where it went from fun to annoying.

Is the theatrical version better?

Well, I've ONLY seen the theatrical version, but I thought it was a blast! I really didn't find anything off about the pacing

Originally Posted by Blu-Velvet

Interesting. I felt the exact opposite about those two films. I immediately got into PERFORMANCE and found it intriguing throughout, but I never quite could go along with INSIGNIFICANCE and often found it pretentiously heavy-handed, even though still interesting and worth seeing. Should probably watch both again one of these nights.

As for MASQUE OF THE RED DEATH, arguably my favorite Corman (or at least Corman Poe film), thanks to Roeg's gorgeous color cinematography and the strong Ingmar Bergman influence, though I now like HOUSE OF USHER much better than I originally did decades ago, and it's also way up there.

Hm. I really didn't find Insignificance pretentious because I thought it successfully handled all of its lofty ideas. Plus...Theresa Russell! She's so incredible in the film as Marilyn Monroe.

AS for Masque: I saw it on my laptop years ago, so I'm sure I'm not giving the cinematography the credit it deserves.

[The Bronx Bull]

Yesterday was an excellent day on the movie-watching front. After wrapping up a two day motorcycle/camping/hiking trip out into the wilderness, I was pretty set on relaxing and enjoying a (blind bought) Criterion for the first part of the day, and then meeting a friend at the theater to see Boyhood (second viewing) later in the evening.

High and Low was the Criterion of choice, and my god, is it phenomenal. Much like everyone else, I associate Kurosawa with samurai, feudal times, and maybe one or two films outside of his traditional scope, like Ikiru. I was not expecting him to tackle the police procedural/ransom/seedy underworld angle as well as he did, and I was pretty blown away. The camera work throughout is some of the best, and that final scene in the prison - rarely do you see reflections used in film as intricately as here. If I had one word to describe this film, however, "influential" would be it. It's amazing to watch and see how modern cinema has pulled techniques from this film, like The Departed, and many other modern crime stories. I highly recommend this film, as I did with Hara-Kiri, seen last week - both absolutely outstanding.

And of course my second viewing of Boyhood was wonderful, and it's fascinating to see the film unfold again. I've already posited my thoughts on this film, however, so just go see it.

[spargs]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

There's a thread in the main forum asking about studio statistics in our collections. I took a quick look at my statistics, and was not surprised to see the Criterion makes a big dent in my collection.

24.9% Criterion
14.4% Warner Bros.
9.8% Olive Films
9.0% Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
7.6% 20th Century Fox
6.5% Twilight Time
6.3% Universal Studios
4.4% Paramount Pictures
3.5% Sony Pictures

If I had put just a little more effort into this month's sale, I could have filled in another 0.1%, but that's okay.

Owl, I just looked at my collection's studio stats... my efforts at this month's B&N sale actually got me to 25% Criterion...

25.0% Criterion
16.7% Warner Bros.
8.7% Universal Studios
8.5% Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
7.6% Disney/Buena Vista
6.2% 20th Century Fox
6.2% Sony Pictures
4.6% Paramount Pictures
3.0% Lionsgate Films
2.5% Twilight Time

I'm finally caught up with what I wanted from Twilight Time's back catalog, and I'm just about caught up with Criterion's (one more sale should do it). Time for me to start delving into what Olive Films has to offer, as I'd been letting their releases pass me by. Hmmm, maybe I should watch some of these unwatched Criterions I own first...

[spargs]

Originally Posted by iScottie

What version of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World do you folks prefer?

I watched the extended cut today and I enjoyed it, but can't help feel that it was extremely dragged out to the point where it went from fun to annoying.

Is the theatrical version better?

I prefer the theatrical cut to the extended version. However, even the theatrical cut feels dragged out to me. I'm thankful for the work that was done to reassemble and restore the extended version, but I'm certain I'll find myself revisiting the theatrical cut more often

[SlickDamian]

My collection is at 42% Criterion, next is 20th Century Fox at 11.2%.
Just ordered the following from the B&N sale, pretty good haul I think:

La Notte
L'eclisse
Insomnia
Riot in Cell Block 11
George Washington
Seconds
Two-Lane Blacktop

Never seen an Antonioni film before. Felt like I wanted to step outside of the box, and went with the recommendations of some people on this forum. Decided to jump right in and order two. Excited to check those out, as well as the others, of course.

[bwdowiak]

sale ending today.

here's what I added this month:

All That Heaven Allows
Paris, Texas
Umberto D
Red River
Picnic at Hanging Rock
Days of Heaven

all that was $100.36 - an average of $16.73 each

[DaveyJoe]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

There's a thread in the main forum asking about studio statistics in our collections. I took a quick look at my statistics, and was not surprised to see the Criterion makes a big dent in my collection.

24.9% Criterion
14.4% Warner Bros.
9.8% Olive Films
9.0% Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
7.6% 20th Century Fox
6.5% Twilight Time
6.3% Universal Studios
4.4% Paramount Pictures
3.5% Sony Pictures

If I had put just a little more effort into this month's sale, I could have filled in another 0.1%, but that's okay.

I'm at 41.9% Criterion. I guess I haven't been buying many BluRays outside of the B&N sales.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by jayembee

[Show spoiler]Not really. I first saw the film back in the 60s, and thought it was one of the most hilarious things I'd ever seen. The second time I saw it was in the 90s when I got it on laserdisc, and this time I felt as you did, that it was dragged out too long and ends up falling flat.

And I normally like Stanley Kramer. Then again, it's his dramas that I normally like.

Originally Posted by ravenus

[Show spoiler]To be frank even the theatrical version seems excessively dragged out to me. Seriously, the "Best Editing" award for this one is hugely mystifying. It seems quite obvious that a lot of scenes happen simply because so-and-so comedian was around for a scene. If you actually recognize those people and know their work, you might get a thrill out of it, but for newer viewers like me, it's a very "shrug" thing.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

[Show spoiler]Well, I've ONLY seen the theatrical version, but I thought it was a blast! I really didn't find anything off about the pacing

Originally Posted by spargs

[Show spoiler]I prefer the theatrical cut to the extended version. However, even the theatrical cut feels dragged out to me. I'm thankful for the work that was done to reassemble and restore the extended version, but I'm certain I'll find myself revisiting the theatrical cut more often

Thanks for the help guys!

I think I will watch the theatrical version to see if my opinion changes. If it doesn't, then I will take it from there.

[ultlife2013]

Sometimes it feels like some people are more happy about getting criterions cheap rather than actually getting the films themselves.

[Page14]

In the "for what it's worth" department, I was looking through TCM's schedule for today, which shows a slate of Bergman films. But those films are being preempted for a day long memorial tribute to James Garner. Bittersweet to some, I guess. James Garner deserves his own day though.

http://www.tcm.com/this-month/movie-...s-James-Garner

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by ultlife2013

Sometimes it feels like some people are more happy about getting criterions cheap rather than actually getting the films themselves.

so philosophical. my head is spinning.

I like it.

[SammyJankis]

It's always on that final day where I feel tempted to splurge on titles I didn't have much interest in during the beginning of the sale.

[shadedpain4]

Statistics are fun:

[Show spoiler]
Criterion - 26.5%
20th Century Fox - 7.8%
Sony - 7.5%
Warner Bros - 7.5%
Lionsgate - 4.4%
Universal - 4.4%
Paramount - 4.2%
Eureka - 3.5%
Well Go USA - 2.3%
Everything Else - 31.9%

Oddly the site lists my collection's total runtime as 112 days, 52 hours, and 10 mins. I would have just gone with 114 days, 4 hours, and 10 mins, but what do I know about time?

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

It's always on that final day where I feel tempted to splurge on titles I didn't have much interest in during the beginning of the sale.

2 of the next 3 titles on my wishlist (Johnny Guitar and The Swimmer) are not CC releases, so I'm hoping that they have some kind of follow up sale on "art" films before my free trial membership runs out.

[dannyfriar]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I think chronological is the best way.

Originally Posted by ravenus

If I have apprehensions about which end of the pool I dive into, I typically make plot synopsis and running time (shorter better for starters) my indicators

Thanks for the suggestions. I ended up watching Shadows. A very interesting film! One of the extras for this film is a short documentary on the restoration process. I knew that restoration wasn't an easy job, but never really knew exactly what went into it! A very interesting and eye-opening documentary!

[jayembee]

Mine was a tad surprising.

Studio (top 5):
18.9% Warner
13.7% Criterion
9.4% Sony
8.6% 20th Century Fox
8.0% Universal

Production decade (top 5):
24.4% 2000s
19.9% 2010s
10.7% 1950s
10.1% 1990s
9.4% 1980s

I think the lower-than-I-expected percentage for Criterion is a result of having a lot of Criterions on DVD, and upgrades are less of a priority. The overwhelming percentage of post-2000 films is also a reflection of focusing on newer films on BD more than upgrades. I've only added Blu-rays to "My Collection", no DVDs. If I added DVDs, I've no doubt that the decade distribution would skew considerably toward the 1930s-1960s. On the other hand, I also suspect that Warner would still be the top studio.

What doesn't surprise me is the genre distribution:

Strongly overrepresented: Film-Noir, Imaginary, Surreal, Western
Overrepresented: Epic, Foreign, Melodrama, Mystery, Period, Psychological thriller, War
Underrepresented: Holiday
Strongly underrepresented: Anime, Documentary, Music, Nature, Other, Sport