The Criterion Collection

[RandomMovieFan]

Could Criterion ever release Gummo 1997 or kids 1995

[dkelly26666]

Nice month of announcements.

On another note, I reveal two secret wants that I have from Criterion. These, mind you, are nothing more than wishful thinking on my part, and not due to any sort of information I have. And I hope I'm not the only one wishing for these.


I am hoping that, before this year is out, that Criterion puts out some kind of physical media for Pasolini, as it's his Centennial (they have a little program on the channel right now, but I'm hoping for some kind of physical, blu ray releases).

And, I am really hoping that there is some sort of big Scorsese box coming. They have a few Scorsese titles, and certainly "After Hours" is on the way sometime, but I have also heard stirrings of them acquiring several other Scorsese films over the past while. I am hoping that they are planning a big box for Scorsese (a'la Bergman and Fellini) at some point.

I know most people are wanting a Kurosawa box, and I'd certainly be Day One for that, too.

Just throwing that out there.

[fdm]

Originally Posted by Rayjg

Why is it so darn hard to line the artwork up in the cases? Scanavo's wreak havoc on artwork that is too far up or down

My Celebration looked like that, but the plastic artwork saved the day. Red Shoes went back though, as did Love Affair.

[latehong]

The cover for Rouge (1987) is underwhelming, even disturbing, for sure, but the inclusion of Yang ± Yin: Gender in Chinese Cinema (1997) and Still Love You After All These (1997) might make this release one of the year's best for me.

[fdm]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I gave up on the streaming channel long ago. Great value for those that don't own the "flagship" content on blu though.

I'm not really drawn there by the "flagship" content, though it's a nice perk since I can't see or own everything I'd like to (and that's more and more the case these days), but typically I'll start with the less readily available or otherwise unavailable content (especially when its expiring soon). There seems to be enough of that there to keep me busy almost forever, and it changes a bit every month. Always something good to watch.

The weak audio just leaves me feeling cheated when it could and should be a lot better, i.e., all channels present and accounted for and with less lossy audio, though apparently that's never gonna happen. So I do tend to spend my time mostly elsewhere for that reason, as I am less inclined to feel like I missed a significant part of the movie when those things are actually available (depending on the movie of course).

[DimitriL]

Originally Posted by fdm

I'm not really drawn there by the "flagship" content, though it's a nice perk since I can't see or own everything I'd like to (and that's more and more the case these days), but typically I'll start with the less readily available or otherwise unavailable content (especially when its expiring soon). There seems to be enough of that there to keep me busy almost forever, and it changes a bit every month. Always something good to watch.

Yeah, the rarer content and especially the curation is why it's a frequent destination for me. I also like having the supplements for physical editions around for a lot of the editions as sometimes I'll just have time to watch the film, then later I'll be at my computer and have time to spin up one of the extras while I'm doing something else.

(And often it's a great sampler for a box set or something! I hadn't seen any of the Melvin Van Peebles films and things are a little tight right now, but I watched Story of a Three Day Pass, and I was delighted enough to put the whole set on my to-buy list.)

[tatterdemalion]

Originally Posted by Reddington

I already have the SC release of The Tales of Hoffmann, so a pass for me this month.

The 15th has become a bit of a double-edged sword. I want titles that interest me to be announced, but feel relieved when there's nothing to add to the already embarrassingly large unwatched pile...

Same here. I have that nice SC The Tales of Hoffman release so don't really need the Criterion. It was nice to see those missing scenes.

What I like about Criterion is that even when I'm not interested in the titles, I'm still kind of interested in the titles.

And I just want a Kurosawa movie, any movie. Hell, I'll take The Idiot over nothing. I know that Drunken Angel, Stray Dog, Red Beard, The Bad Sleep Well, Dersu Uzala, & Dodeskaden has been mentioned by others. How about The Lower Depths? Is it a problem of them wanting to release both the Kurosawa and Renoir versions together again and can't? I really can't afford box sets so I hope single title releases are in the works for the near future. I pre-ordered Dreams and everything's gone POOF since.

[Egbert Souse]

I’m in for Shaft UHD, Tales, and Pink Flamingos. Guess I need to pick up the rest of the Waters discs in July too (only have Polyester).

[The Sovereign]

Originally Posted by tatterdemalion

What I like about Criterion is that even when I'm not interested in the titles, I'm still kind of interested in the titles.

Me too - very well said! I've discovered a lot of great films from them over the years for which I had no initial excitement, but my interest was piqued just enough to see what they were. Doesn't always pay off, but it's more than enough to keep me coming back.

[bwdowiak]

I think Criterion should perhaps move on from cartoon looking cover art. It isn't a deterrent to me buying anything I'm interested in. It just seems to be overdone at this point and I'm not sure some of it really fits.

Does the artwork for Mr. Klein or Rouge or The Worst Person in the World accurately convey to the unacquainted what these films are about? I haven't seen any of these films, so I'm asking. I have seen the trailers, though, and I'm inclined to say 'hard no,' 'no,' and 'no' respectively.

[Abdrewes]

Slapdash release, slapdash disc handling.

[ShellBeacher]

Originally Posted by filmlover22

Director Approved? Hopefully not revised/cut... )

Was this recut by Kwan for this recent restoration?? I'm holding onto the HK Blu I have for a while, just in case... But will be buying anyway just for the docs included, which I've been wanting to get a hold of for-evah. But the art is a turn-off, yes.

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I think Criterion should perhaps move on from cartoon looking cover art. It isn't a deterrent to me buying anything I'm interested in. It just seems to be overdone at this point and I'm not sure some of it really fits.

Does the artwork for Mr. Klein or Rouge or The Worst Person in the World accurately convey to the unacquainted what these films are about? I haven't seen any of these films, so I'm asking. I have seen the trailers, though, and I'm inclined to say 'hard no,' 'no,' and 'no' respectively.

While I am enormously grateful for Criterion finally getting ROUGE out there to the U.S. ...
Agreed on the "art." Not the best. And no, I think art for both ROUGE and WORST PERSON could be better...these are not Digital Animations like "A Spanner Darkly" or Almodovar pics. These are two of the most real films about a woman's dilemma that you will ever see (and that's no insult to Almodovar -- who also makes some of the best! But this art reminds me of 'Woman on the Verge' etc.)


And I notice there are plenty of people in the thread who still can't spell ROUGE. ;-)

[DimitriL]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I think Criterion should perhaps move on from cartoon looking cover art. It isn't a deterrent to me buying anything I'm interested in. It just seems to be overdone at this point and I'm not sure some of it really fits.

Does the artwork for Mr. Klein or Rouge or The Worst Person in the World accurately convey to the unacquainted what these films are about? I haven't seen any of these films, so I'm asking. I have seen the trailers, though, and I'm inclined to say 'hard no,' 'no,' and 'no' respectively.

Okay, I can maybe see what you're talking about with Rouge or Worst Person, but Mr. Klein? It's about an art dealer and the cover is full of paranoia, which is entirely appropriate to the theme. And I mean, now we're classifying modernist paintings as "cartoon looking?" Are we just going to start lumping all non-photoreal art into this bucket?

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by DimitriL

Okay, I can maybe see what you're talking about with Rouge or Worst Person, but Mr. Klein? It's about an art dealer and the cover is full of paranoia, which is entirely appropriate to the theme. And I mean, now we're classifying modernist paintings as "cartoon looking?" Are we just going to start lumping all non-photoreal art into this bucket?

I think they need to try something different. again, it isn't going to preclude me from buying movies I'm interested in. it's just seems that they've gone to that well far too many times.

is the artwork for Miracle in Milan and The Funeral considered modernist? if yes, then yes.. I am going to call it cartoon looking. I don't know modernist from contemporary or from any other art movement, so I'm not lumping. I'm only representing those unacquainted with the film or with the style of art. do these convey the themes of these films in the best possible sense, so as to attract new audiences? I don't know that they do.

[MifuneFan]

Rouge isn't a cartoon cover either. It's an illustration inspired by a famous scene in the film. I'm iffy about the the artificial look of their faces (which is simply the artists' style), but I really like the idea of her striking clothing blending into the entire background of the cover.

I don't know why this has to be repeated so often, but art is subjective.. What some people love, others hate. It's always amusing when people make generalizations about Criterion's covers, when they are among the most diverse in style of any boutique label out there. They're not all cartoons, they're not all abstract, they're not all this or that.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Rouge isn't a cartoon cover either. It's an illustration inspired by a famous scene in the film. I'm iffy about the the artificial look of their faces (which is simply the artists' style), but I really like the idea of her striking clothing blending into the entire background of the cover.

I don't know why this has to be repeated so often, but art is subjective.. What some people love, others hate. It's always amusing when people make generalizations about Criterion's covers, when they are among the most diverse in style of any boutique label out there. They're not all cartoons, they're not all abstract, they're not all this or that.

that's cool you like it. I have no idea to whom or to what you are responding to with the second paragraph.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

that's cool you like it. I have no idea to whom or to what you are responding to with the second paragraph.

It wasn't to anyone in particular as it was addressing a number of comments that tend to be repeated all the time, but some of it can apply to you too. You say Criterion should just do away with cartoon covers, as if it's all one thing, as if none of them could actually fit with the context of any film. And your definition of what constitutes a "cartoon cover" is clearly inaccurate, so it makes me wonder how wide a net you're really casting here.

For instance, in June, Criterion are also releasing Shaft 4K done by a famous comic book artist. And most people love the hell out of it. It fits the themes of Shaft perfectly well, and personally I think it looks excellent. Is it a cartoon cover in your book? Should Criterion not have commissioned it?



And I've also voiced my distaste with the cover for The Worst Person in the World, but that's not to say what is shown on the cover doesn't fit with the context of the film. I pointed to another "cartoon" cover from the same artist, which I strongly prefer:



The thing is, none of us have a monopoly with our opinions. I was actually pretty surprised to find a ton of love for Criterion's cover of "The Worst Person..." on social media. I mean, if someone came across that cover in the store, they're going to do a double-take for sure, so sometimes even controversial ones that you or I may find ugly may still do the job of drawing people in to find out more about it.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

[Show spoiler]It was a general statemen, but it can apply to you too. You say Criterion should just do away with cartoon covers as if it's all one thing. And your definition of what constitutes a "cartoon cover" , so it makes me wonder how wide a net you're really casting here.

For instance, in June, Criterion are also releasing Shaft 4K done by a famous comic book artist. And most people love the hell out of it. It fits the themes of Shaft perfectly well, and personally I think it looks excellent. Is it a cartoon cover in your book? Should Criterion not have commissioned it? I already voiced that I didn't care



And I've also voiced my distaste with the cover for The Worst Person in the World, but that's not to say the stuff shown on the cover doesn't fit with the movie. I pointed to another "cartoon" cover from the same artist, which I strongly prefer:



The thing is, none of us have a monopoly with our opinions. I was actually pretty surprised to find a ton of love for Criterion's cover on social media. I mean, if someone came across that cover in the store, they're going to do a double-take for sure, so sometimes even controversial ones that you or I may find ugly may still do the job of drawing people in to find out more about it.

the Shaft artwork is pretty bad ass.

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say, "monopoly with our opinions." I think you are having a conversation with yourself. since you pointed out (unnecessarily) that art is subjective, then you are "clearly inaccurate" when you say that me saying that some of the artwork looks like a cartoon is somehow wrong. that is my opinion. my opinion is not that I don't like it. I just wondered aloud if the art was suited to films that I had not yet seen.

I haven't seen either of these films. can I expect the same type of film watching experience?

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

The thing is, none of us have a monopoly with our opinions.

You don’t know me! I do what I want!

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

the Shaft artwork is pretty bad ass.

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say, "monopoly with our opinions." I think you are having a conversation with yourself. since you pointed out (unnecessarily) that art is subjective, then you are "clearly inaccurate" when you say that me saying that some of the artwork looks like a cartoon is somehow wrong. that is my opinion. my opinion is not that I don't like it. I just wondered aloud if the art was suited to films that I had not yet seen.

Read what I said again. I very clearly, and specifically said your interpretation of what constitutes a cartoon cover is inaccurate. I pointed out for instance that Rouge is not a cartoon cover but illustration. You seem to call anything that's drawn, and not a photo a cartoon, which again, is not an accurate definition of cartoon (which is why I questioned how wide a net you're casting). In no way did I say your opinion of not liking such covers is inaccurate. You are entitled to your opinions.