The Criterion Collection

[PowellPressburger]

One film I wish Criterion could get from MGM and save is BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA

I think a BLU was released for it in Spain? I believe. I listen to the soundtrack and have the MGM dvd release, but this is a film that needs a broader release thru Criterion.

[jacobsever]

Originally Posted by also

If you haven't gone poking around the music blogs for all the out of print LP rips then, you are either missing out or saving yourself from a bottomless pit of timesink.

The majority of what I like is mid to late 60's stuff (and I'm only 22!). I've gone to so many blogs and downloaded so many albums it's impossible to keep track and count everything.
I'm about to go crazy again, because I'm pretty sure I started getting into 50's music, of which I have almost none on my computer. Will need to go on a downloading spree.

[greekak229]

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

One film I wish Criterion could get from MGM and save is BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA

I think a BLU was released for it in Spain? I believe. I listen to the soundtrack and have the MGM dvd release, but this is a film that needs a broader release thru Criterion.

Good choice. That's a fantastic film.

[greekak229]

Originally Posted by chetripley80

For all of the Wes Anderson bashers here, which other current American filmmaker do you think deserves to be part of the Criterion collection (that would fit in with the collection)? Soderbergh? They've already released three films by him. How about Malick? Oh yeah... they've released two of his films as well.

I would like to see the works of Darren Aronosfsky, Alexander Payne, David Lynch, and Paul Thomas Anderson released by Criterion, but in all likeliness that's just not possible (outside of maybe Alexander Payne). The studios (or filmmakers in the case of Lynch) want to hold onto their films and release them.

It's clearly evident that Anderson's collection of films share many themes with the collection, and it's obvious that Anderson was largely influenced by many of the directors that Criterion has recognized. I can't remember where I read it, but I'm pretty sure Anderson once said his film school were the supplemental features from Criterion's video/laserdisc releases.

Plus, Anderson's Criterion releases sell like hotcakes (although I really don't think too many hip teenagers are buying his films in droves). You can't blame Criterion for wanting to make enough money to keep themselves afloat in the downward spiral of the home video market. Without Wes Anderson and some of the other popular releases that get whined about, Criterion probably wouldn't be able to release quite a few of the lesser-known films that people appreciate.

All those names you mentioned films would be great additions to all our collections. You know, I admire Wes' approach on trying to make enjoyable low-budget indie films, but dear lord, they are just so boring, and for someone whose absolute favorite genre of film is drama, there's a problem there. Those names you mentioned are all so much more deserving in having their movies released by Criterion, and they would probably sell just as equally if not more so than Anderson's.

[bobeink]

David Gordon Green. They released George Washington many moons ago...a nice release for either All the Real Girls, Undertow, or even Snow Angels would make my day!

Originally Posted by chetripley80

For all of the Wes Anderson bashers here, which other current American filmmaker do you think deserves to be part of the Criterion collection (that would fit in with the collection)? Soderbergh? They've already released three films by him. How about Malick? Oh yeah... they've released two of his films as well.

I would like to see the works of Darren Aronosfsky, Alexander Payne, David Lynch, and Paul Thomas Anderson released by Criterion, but in all likeliness that's just not possible (outside of maybe Alexander Payne). The studios (or filmmakers in the case of Lynch) want to hold onto their films and release them.

It's clearly evident that Anderson's collection of films share many themes with the collection, and it's obvious that Anderson was largely influenced by many of the directors that Criterion has recognized. I can't remember where I read it, but I'm pretty sure Anderson once said his film school were the supplemental features from Criterion's video/laserdisc releases.

Plus, Anderson's Criterion releases sell like hotcakes (although I really don't think too many hip teenagers are buying his films in droves). You can't blame Criterion for wanting to make enough money to keep themselves afloat in the downward spiral of the home video market. Without Wes Anderson and some of the other popular releases that get whined about, Criterion probably wouldn't be able to release quite a few of the lesser-known films that people appreciate.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by chetripley80

For all of the Wes Anderson bashers here, which other current American filmmaker do you think deserves to be part of the Criterion collection (that would fit in with the collection)? Soderbergh? They've already released three films by him. How about Malick? Oh yeah... they've released two of his films as well.

I would like to see the works of Darren Aronosfsky, Alexander Payne, David Lynch, and Paul Thomas Anderson released by Criterion

I'm not going to go through who should be in the collection because that isn't the reason of my dislike for Anderson's films, but I will answer your question of fav modern American director and will keep saying James Gray. He has to be so underrated to the average American film lover, yet he works in mainstream cinema. You always hear Tarantino, Nolan, the Andersons (though Paul Thomas Anderson is my 2nd fav), Aronosfsky (can't wait to see the suckfest when his X-men movie or whatever it's called comes out), etc. Yet, IMO, he has made 2 of the best American films of the last decade.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by connelly13

I know this is the Criterion thread, but do you honestly not know the director of Juno? I like Jason Reitman movies, hip or not.

Edit: I just learned a couple pages back that his dad has a movie in the Criterion Collection.

I know who he is I just didn't know he directed Juno......

I have Napoleon Dynamite and Juno on DVD.... I won't be buying the Blu-rays, but I certainly purchased both at one time or another.....



I also didn't delete any posts CG....... I was just pointing out that your argument wasn't rational because you don't think anyone's opinion on anything is important, if they think Wes Anderson has made an enjoyable film or two.


EDIT: over 1,000,000 people have viewed this thread....... there must be the meaning of life encrypted within these posts somewhere

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

I was just pointing out that your argument wasn't rational because you don't think anyone's opinion on anything is important, if they think Wes Anderson has made an enjoyable film or two.

Okay, I understand that, but for one I jumped into a post war of this, so I didn't start it, this time. 2, I never said no one's opinion isn't important. I haven't singled anyone out, that hasn't singled me out (not starting the CG hate crap. Go re-read anyone that doesn't believe me). Also, I never said Anderson's films isn't enjoyable, having told of my liking of Life Aquatic over and over. I believe I jumped into this (anyone can go look through today if they want) when it got to comparing the output of really important directors to Andersons and saying the releases of Criterion is fair. IF and I mean IF we are basing this off of output, Anderson has 5 of his 6 films released, while the directors that the poster compared to, Godard and Kurosawa, Godard doesn't have that percentage at all. On top of that, these are guys that made guys like Anderson. So how is he more important is what me and a couple of other guys are really getting at. Since you know, Criterion says "important films".

No one needs to keep saying it's a business, we know. But they might want to change "Important", unless they are like Jersey Shore "important" and not really important. Just say "Important films, with other films here and there that help pay the bills".

[Beta Man]

Speaking of "important" in terms of cinematic evolution (if you will).....

It would be interesting to see them try to get the rights to a blacksploitation film....... I wonder what they would consider one of the earliest important founding members of that group.......

EDIT: I guess "In the Heat of the Night" is considered the "first" I haven't seen it.... Netflix here I come.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Speaking of "important" in terms of cinematic evolution (if you will).....

It would be interesting to see them try to get the rights to a blacksploitation film....... I wonder what they would consider one of the earliest important founding members of that group.......

See I would love having exploitation films than these IFC deals. How do you know years from now one of these new films are going to hold up? Not just Andersons', but everything this decade that has been released. Oh well, they care about making money now and not worried years from now if any movie that put in the "Important" collection can't hold up.


Blaxploitation, I always liked and own:

Trouble Man (I believe my very first that I owned.)
Black Caesar
Hell Up in Harlem
Foxy Brown
Coffy
Sugar Hill (don't own but love)
The Mack

a non blaxploitation but exploitation/cult film that I hope Criterion gets is

Rolling Thunder (very good film. Exploitation in subject, but one of the best made that period that holds up to the likes of Taxi Driver, etc.)

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by chetripley80

For all of the Wes Anderson bashers here, which other current American filmmaker do you think deserves to be part of the Criterion collection (that would fit in with the collection)? Soderbergh? They've already released three films by him. How about Malick? Oh yeah... they've released two of his films as well.

I don't see Gus Van Sant, Tom DiCillo, Abel Ferrara...

I am not a Wes Anderson basher. Being one implies that his films actually inspired me to ignore him, and to be honest, aside from a few Japanese exploitation films courtesy of a well known underground director, which I saw back in the early 80s on the Left Bank, no other films have been able to inspire me to ignore a film director. The point I was attempting to make is that ideally the Criterion collection should be used to not only 'preserve' important classic films but also reintroduce forgotten ones, as well as promote acclaimed contemporary films. I understand why Mr. Anderson's films are in the collection - they sell well and attract younger viewers who may or may not become collectors. This is great. But there is a large number of acclaimed American directors whose films have really had an enormous impact on American cinema as a whole who, as cliche as it may sound, deserve to be in it - granted of course there are no serious rights issues that prevent Criterion from adding their films to the collection. Here are a few examples (not in a particular order):

1. Joseph Losey
2. Gus Van Sant -
3. Dalton Trumbo
4. Budd Boetticher
5. Jerry Schatzberg
6. David Lynch
7. Hal Ashby
8. Abel Ferrara
9. Stanley Kramer
10. Jack Garfein
11. Joseph Strick
12. Paul Mazursky
13. Ralph Nelson
14. Elliot Silverstein
15. Sam O'Steen
16. Robert Mulligan
17. Robert Benton
18. Philip Dunne
19. Aram Avakian
20. Tom DiCillo
etc....

Pro-B

[SpiderBaby]

No wonder I haven't got the boot from this place. Well also it helps that I never have called people names on here and post like crazy.


Do you like James Gray Pro-B?

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

No wonder I haven't got the boot from this place.

There aren't many stories that don't have a good antagonist


EDIT:

I applaud the release of things such as "By Brakhage" although I still have only made a small dent in the material.....

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

There aren't many stories that don't have a good antagonist

Well I like to think I'm the "bad guy" that is liked. Let's think of comparisons:

Tony Montana from Scarface
Darth Vader from Star Wars
Dracula from pretty much every Dracula movie ever made
The Oakland Raiders organization (coincidence that they are my football team? I think not!)
CM Punk for you wrestling fans (because I am better than all of you!)
Playboy
that kid that stole a bunch of crap and ran across the U.S. (what's his name?)

You know, like those.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Do you like James Gray Pro-B?

His early films, yes. I thought that Tim Roth was spectacular in Little Odessa (that was a problematic film to get on SDVD; I think that it was Pioneer that released it). But Gray has been struggling since The Yards.

Pro-B

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

The early ones, yes. I thought that Tim Roth was spectacular in Little Odessa (that was a problematic film to get on SDVD; I think that it was Pioneer that released it). But Gray has been struggling since The Yards.

Pro-B

Really? Interesting. Respect your opinion. But I feel We Own The Night to be a great take on French gangster films that Gray turned very well into a mainstream Action/Drama. Two Lovers, while not as great I feel as WOTN, it was one of my favs of 09. But your opinion, my opinion. Atleast you talked about him.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Really? Interesting. Respect your opinion. But I feel We Own The Night to be a great take on French gangster films that Gray turned very well into a mainstream Action/Drama. Two Lovers, while not as great I feel as WOTN, it was one of my favs of 09. But your opinion, my opinion. Atleast you talked about him.

When he shoots a film outside of New York City, I will change my opinion.

Pro-B

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

When he shoots a film outside of New York City, I will change my opinion.

Pro-B

Ah, got ya. Yeah one of my fav 70's directors Paul Morrissey, pretty much known for New York (Warhol, films-Flesh, Trash, Heat, born there, etc), yet he shot elsewhere in a couple of films (the 2 horror films in the Criterion Collection.) But he did bring New York with him. I have never been to New York (so many places there I want to see) but I never get tired of the whole "New York groove", so to say, in films.

Anyways, you might get that. Isn't Gray suppose to direct The Lost City of Z next? Unless he finds a way to turn New York into 1920's Brazil.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Anyways, you might get that. Isn't Gray suppose to direct The Lost City of Z next? Unless he finds a way to turn New York into 1920's Brazil.

Unfortunately, CG, I am not well informed about his future projects. I've only seen what has been made available on SDVD and Blu-ray.

Pro-B

[greekak229]

As a minor interruption, I'm thinking about blind-buying The Magician tomorrow. Is this a wise idea, or should I get other things that have been on my wishlist for sometime like ITROTS or The Thin Red Line?