The Criterion Collection

[dwk]

Originally Posted by movieben1138

So did John Ford rise from the dead and influence the release of Stagecoach? Or was that a special exception? I know the DVD I had of it was in the Warner Bros. Ford/Wayne box set.

WB did not own the rights to Stagecoach, they had licensed it from Westchester Films and when that deal was up, Criterion stepped in and licensed it.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by movieben1138

So did John Ford rise from the dead and influence the release of Stagecoach? Or was that a special exception? I know the DVD I had of it was in the Warner Bros. Ford/Wayne box set.

Warner Bros didn't actually own Stagecoach. It was produced by Walter Wanger, and originally released by United Artists. Hitchcock's Foreign Correspondent was another Wanger/UA title that Criterion released that had previously been released by Warner on DVD.

Both films (and many others) ended up under the control of Castle Hill Productions, from which Warner licensed them.

On edit: Just to clarify the conflict between my answer and movieben1138's, Warner licensed the film(s) from Castle Hill. Castle Hill basically folded back about five years ago, and Westchester Films acquired its catalog. Criterion licenses the films from Westchester.

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Warner Bros didn't actually own Stagecoach. It was produced by Walter Wanger, and originally released by United Artists. Hitchcock's Foreign Correspondent was another Wanger/UA title that Criterion released that had previously been released by Warner on DVD.

Both films (and many others) ended up under the control of Castle Hill Productions, from which Warner licensed them.

On edit: Just to clarify the conflict between my answer and movieben1138's, Warner licensed the film(s) from Castle Hill. Castle Hill basically folded back about five years ago, and Westchester Films acquired its catalog. Criterion licenses the films from Westchester.

To Be or Not to Be was also part of the Castle Hill group.

[shadedpain4]

For any of you Kubrick fans that are reasonably close to Toronto

[demonknight]

You know what would make for a great Criterion? Richard O'Brien and Jim Sharmin's Shock Treatment (1981). It's stylish (Looking for Trade looks amazing) and has a relatively strong cult following. Not to mention it predicted reality TV.

[CraigThom]

Originally Posted by demonknight

You know what would make for a great Criterion? Richard O'Brien and Jim Sharmin's Shock Treatment (1981). It's stylish (Looking for Trade looks amazing) and has a relatively strong cult following. Not to mention it predicted reality TV.

I think that's more likely to be a Shout! Factory release, although when I asked them about it they said they tried and were told no.

They just released Phantom of the Paradise, so it's a good fit.

[ultlife2013]

They're doing a screening of Kubrick's films at a downtown theater starting October 31st with The Shining.

[pedromvu]

Just in case someone missed it on the Criterion website:

http://www.rogerebert.com/mzs/why-my...terion-blu-ray

this essay by critic Matt Zoller Seitz was supposed to appear on the release of All That Jazz but it was pulled because there were possible rights issues.

It is pretty good, almost makes me want to watch the movie again.

[Fellini912]

Originally Posted by jayembee

My standard response to this question is "The primary responsibility of a filmmaker is to make a good film; fidelity to the source is secondary. Blade Runner is terrible as an adapation of Philip Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, but I would not want to live in a world that did not have Blade Runner in it."

It really depends on the resultant work. Some of the changes Kubrick made in adapting Anthony Burgess's A Clockwork Orange were for the better, but some of the changes he made in adapting Stephen King's The Shining were for the worse.

Given a choice, I'd rather the filmmaker stay truer to the spirit of the original work than to the letter of it. I think Niels Arden Oplev's version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was a more accurate "translation" of Stieg Larsson's book than David Fincher's was, but Fincher's version felt truer to the spirit of the book. I preferred Fincher's film.

A lot of posters have made some excellent points about interpreting anovel/source for film. As yourself and other posters have noted, it really comes down to originality (Blade Runner is a great example, I find it original enough that it is almost completely different than the novel/short story).

I really enjoy a film that pushes for an original interpretation of the novel/source. It gives you a reason to watch the film, instead of re-reading the novel.

Originally Posted by jayembee

I know someone who saw that documentary, and thought Jodorowsky's film would've ended up a mess. There were a lot of talented people involved in the production, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the end product is going to be good.

I would encourage you to watch the documentary and see what you think.

Let me remind you that a fraction of the production team (Dan O'Bannon, Giger and Moebius) working on Jodorowsky's Dune are responsible for creative work in Alien (a true scifi masterpiece). Ridley Scott also used/stole Moebius and O'Bannon's idea/tone/ atmosphere for Blade Runner, is a little known fact (A Long Tomorrow- just look at vista of the drawings).

A person that worked in Hollywood at the time said that production/drawing boards were filled with cuttings from Heavy Metal (Moebius et al). The Fifth Element is a rip-off of Incal (Jodorowsky and Moebius' graphic novel), there is a court case about the issue.

In conclusion, I am almost certain that Jodorowsky's Dune would have been excellent. But the downside would have been Alien never being made.

[Fellini912]

Originally Posted by ijustblumyself

Just finished a rewatch of 8 1/2, and just like all great films I got something new out of it.
I was also left wondering whether Fellini's portrayal of women is vaguely sexist, or more a satire of his shallow male protagonist's view of women. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I am glad you think 8 1/2 is a great movie, which it truly is.

Anyone can misinterpret Fellini's honesty, maybe that is the flaw of the movie, it is too honest.

Fellini gives us a film about what men "truly" think about women. The mother, the sister, the wife, the lover, ...respect, fear, love, lust. If there is a man who thinks himself otherwise than he is a celibate person or has never been in a relationship with a woman or is basically not being as honest as Fellini.

I remember watching this film when I was single. It did not have much of an impact as being married and older. I cannot wait for the release of La Dolce Vita.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by jayembee

I know someone who saw that documentary, and thought Jodorowsky's film would've ended up a mess. There were a lot of talented people involved in the production, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the end product is going to be good.

You might be right actually. It would have been truly a weird film had Jodorowsky actually made Dune.

Earlier tonight I watched about 35-40 minutes of El Topo in a local arthouse theater before I walked out. The screening ended up being free because they had to use a DVD with a watermark to show the film cause their original copy malfunctioned. Still, just seeing this crazy cult classic in a theater was cool but I want to see the entire movie in a better way and not have to see a watermark that says "Property of Abkco Films" the entire time on the top one third of the screen.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by demonknight

You know what would make for a great Criterion? Richard O'Brien and Jim Sharmin's Shock Treatment (1981). It's stylish (Looking for Trade looks amazing) and has a relatively strong cult following. Not to mention it predicted reality TV.

No, it didn't. Bertrand Tavernier's Death Watch predicted reality TV a year earlier. And even that's not quite true, since Death Watch was based on a novel by D.G. Compton titled The Continuous Katherine Mortenhoe (a.k.a. The Unsleeping Eye) that was published in 1974.

I highly recommend Death Watch; it's one of my Top Five SF films of all time. It's available on Blu-ray from Shout Factory. Review is here.

[Makarov]

Well I blind bought Picnic at Hanging Rock just because the premise sounded cool, and seemed like a good spooky story for halloween, hopefully that wasn't a mistake...

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Well I blind bought Picnic at Hanging Rock just because the premise sounded cool, and seemed like a good spooky story for halloween, hopefully that wasn't a mistake...

Not so sure about "spooky," but definitely intriguing and thought-provoking, besides beautiful to look at.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Well I blind bought Picnic at Hanging Rock just because the premise sounded cool, and seemed like a good spooky story for halloween, hopefully that wasn't a mistake...

Don't want to be negative about your purchase, but I hope you're won't be disappointed.
I think this is not a film for everyone and not a blind-buy material.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Well I blind bought Picnic at Hanging Rock just because the premise sounded cool, and seemed like a good spooky story for halloween, hopefully that wasn't a mistake...

This is a special and very mysterious film. I wouldn't recommend it as a horror film or anything revolving around Halloween. It's more of a paranormal "horror" if you want to call it that but one of my favorite blind-buy purchases of ALL TIME.

[deepbreathsanddeath]

Picnic at Hanging Rock is a good choice for Halloween season IMO. It's beautiful and eerie as hell. Don't expect to be scared silly in the traditional sense. It's all atmosphere but I personally find it leaves a chilling effect on me, so maybe you'll agree.

[jw007]

Hey, anyone here see Ken Russell's Gothic? I just watched it. It was filmed in 1986 apparently. What a crazy, weird picture. Totally insane stuff. Absolutely mad. Freakish horror. Needs to be seen to be believed.

[octagon]

I don't usually tear out my hair or rend my garments over favored movies getting non-C releases but I really, really wish New York could have somehow wrangled Only Lovers Left Alive.

Taken as a whole it something of a messs but gawd what an interesting draped, beautifully accessorized mess. The sets and props could have easily come off as two hours of hipster fan service but it all really, really worked.

I've only watched it 1.5 times so far and it's already nearing the top of my vampire films list.

Just imagine if it was graced with a some choice interviews and a whacky c.

Oh well, I jus bought Eating Raoul used at gohastings. That will have to be my consolation prize this week.

(I both apologize for and absolve muself of responsibility for typos. it's really hard to edit when the freaking words won't sit still.)

[Clare2904]

May I ask a favour? If any Hulu Plus member is willing to help me out with a film currently available please send me a PM. I shall explain more in private.

Thanks