The Criterion Collection

[repete66211]

Criterion has partnered with IFC? Cool. IFC has rerun some great TV lately. And they finally stopped stretched 3:4 content to 16:9 screens. I just wish their movie selection were as good as their TV programs.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

...but without the words "in my opinion" or "I think" attached the statement it comes across as a generalized be-all, end-all statement... which, of course, it's not.

CC

I sometimes tend to think demanding qualifiers for obvious subjective evaluations (like good and bad, for instance) is IMO a little on the silly side.

If he had added 'and that's a fact' well then sure, jump on that.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

Important = Opinion.

Now if one wants to blindly follow Criterion's opinion, go right ahead. It wouldn't be the first time someone has followed other's opinions as truth.

Completely perpendicular to anything I was saying. My point was that if you are criticizing the current IFC deal, then you are also criticizing the entirety of Criterion's publishing career as contemporary titles have always been part of their mission statement.

Though as for my opinion, I think you're crazy if you think a contemporary film can't be important. Art can be important in the here and now, not just as some historic artifact to be looked back upon. The relative importance of any piece of art can come and go as society changes around it. I'm not saying I agree with the "importance" of every film Criterion chooses - but that goes for their "classic" as well as their contemporary selections.

[SpiderBaby]

I never said contemporary isn't great. I'm saying how can Criterion tell us what contemporary films are important (opinion)? Older films have left impacts to where you can see the importance and don't need a business to tell you it is.

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by octagon

I sometimes tend to think demanding qualifiers for obvious subjective evaluations (like good and bad, for instance) is IMO a little on the silly side.

If he had added 'and that's a fact' well then sure, jump on that.

+1

If it's an opinion there is no need to say "in my opinion" (even though I do it all the time). If I say Spielberg is sentimental and formulaic that's an opinion so I don't really need to say IMO. If I were making an argument I should include examples of why I think Spielberg is sentimental and formulaic, but that's beside the point.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

I never said contemporary isn't great. I'm saying how can Criterion tell us what contemporary films are important (opinion)? Older films have left impacts to where you can see the importance and don't need a business to tell you it is.

It is their opinion...

I thought you were real big on people having their own opinions - does that not extend to Criterion? Or should they play it safe and just release the films everyone agrees are important, and pigeonhole themselves into the same category you ***** and moan about on a monthly basis?

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

It is their opinion...

I thought you were real big on people having their own opinions - does that not extend to Criterion? Or should they play it safe and just release the films everyone agrees are important, and pigeonhole themselves into the same category you ***** and moan about on a monthly basis?

Now your just being a D. First you try to use big words to try to prove a point, while then putting words in my mouth, only to come back with this crap.

1. Yeah people should have their own opinions. THAT IS WHY I SAY YOU SHOULDN'T THINK CRITERION RELEASES IMPORTANT THINGS ALL THE TIME! Does anybody ever read? I mean I don't use big words trying to act like a douche, so it isn't hard.

2. I don't have a company that releases films to even label them as important. So your comparing me to a company? wow.

3. Wasn't I the one defending the obscure films in the BBS set? WTF happened to where now you think I said Criterion should play it safe?

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

Now your just being a D. First you try to use big words to try to prove a point, while then putting words in my mouth, only to come back with this crap.

1. Yeah people should have their own opinions. THAT IS WHY I SAY YOU SHOULDN'T THINK CRITERION RELEASES IMPORTANT THINGS ALL THE TIME! Does anybody ever read? I mean I don't use big words trying to act like a douche, so it isn't hard.

2. I don't have a company that releases films to even label them as important. So your comparing me to a company? wow.

This is, again, a perpendicular response. Way to not actually respond to what I'm saying, and insert your own (imagined) subtext into everything. I can't even imagine what you're talking about - comparing you to a company? What?

I was just having fun and trying to discuss your posts in a non-angsty manner. I thought your initial posts were kind of rude, but I decided to take the high road and engage you in a friendly discussion. And this is how you respond? This is why people think you're a jerk.

edit: And which big words did I use? Perpendicular? Too funny.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

This is, again, a perpendicular response. Way to not actually respond to what I'm saying, and insert your own (imagined) subtext into everything.

I was just having fun and trying to discuss your posts in a non-angsty manner. I thought your initial posts were kind of rude, but I decided to take the high road and engage you in a friendly discussion. And this is how you respond? Circular logic and raging? This is why people think you're a jerk.

Whatever, like I care. You were a jerk when you thought you were having "fun". But it's fine for you to have "fun" but I'm the jerk.
I defended obscure films and you said I think Criterion should play it safe? Sure.
I was trying to say Criterion's opinions shouldn't have you believing they are real (which means have your own opinions on things, like I have always said, but you thought I said the opposite.). I don't get that.

What did I miss? That I'm a big jerk? No, some people on here feel that way, others don't. It just seems like the same 4 or 5 people that call me sh*t, so I'm not worried.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

Whatever, like I care. You were a jerk when you thought you were having "fun". But it's fine for you to have "fun" but I'm the jerk.
I defended obscure films and you said I think Criterion should play it safe? Sure.
I was trying to say Criterion's opinions shouldn't have you believing they are real (which means have your own opinions on things, like I have always said, but you thought I said the opposite.). I don't get that.

What did I miss? That I'm a big jerk? No, some people on here feel that way, others don't.

I think it is very possible you have a communication disorder as you routinely get into arguments where you rage and rage about imagined insults, all the while being incredibly insulting yourself. I seriously have no idea what you are complaining about right now.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

I never said contemporary isn't great. I'm saying how can Criterion tell us what contemporary films are important (opinion)? Older films have left impacts to where you can see the importance and don't need a business to tell you it is.

Well obviously whether a contemporary film or director is going to have a lasting impact is basically a guess but that doesn't mean it can't be an educated guess.

[edit: educated guesses aside, I do agree the chances of either one of us living long enough to see The Royal Tenenbaums on any AFI lists are awfully slim]

[drbikeshorts]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rock, stone View Post
Since everyone is choosing sides, I think Fight Club is great. It was originally maligned by a generation of critics who completely missed the joke, while inspiring a fair number of numbskull fans who also missed the joke.

Originally Posted by repete66211

I've always been on the fence about Fight Club. Not because I'm ambivalent. Almost the opposite of that. I oscillate between "like" and "contempt" for it, partly because it's one of those movies that's hard to divorce from its fans. Regardless, it's been like an itch I can't find. Your succinct summation of the movie scratched that itch. Well done.

Yeah, I'm often on the fence with Fight Club. Whenever I've watched it my opinion has changed. It's often a problem when a film is commenting on the violence it depicts; the message gets lost in the depiction. This is why the film also attracts fans that glorify the violence and think it's cool.
I remember hearing that Pekinpah was disillusioned when he found out people thought he was glorifying violence, when he was really trying to depict the horror of violence.
I'm pretty sure I haven't seen Fight Club since I saw it theatrically and I really couldn't be bothered going back to it.

[BasicGreatGuy]

Got "Sweet Smell of Success" and "Senso" today from Amazon. Packaging for "Sweet Smell of Success" is really nice. Will watch that one tonight.

[iam1bearcat]

Aw shucks. While I was at work I missed an intriguing Fight Club debate / discussion

Fight Club is / was my absolute favorite film for many years. Hell, still might be, but I haven't really thought about making a thorough favorites list in quite some time. Now, with that said, while Fight Club will always be a film I love, it's one that I know for sure isn't gonna be remembered as a great film or one that should have won awards. There are dozens upon dozens of better made films, but Fight Club is still something wholly unique and special in my eyes. Hell, it was the first real drama I watched and fell in love with. It's what got me into film more than anything else, so it does have some special meaning to me that others will not have.

Although, for awards, maybe like "best editing", "best adapted screenplay" and "best sound" but nothing more. But still, a great film imo. Its been months since I've watched it though, so it'll be interesting to see what I think after months 'away' while expanding and exploring my tastes. I know I'll still love it, but I don't know where it would fall at the end of the day on a list of absolute favorites anymore.

[octagon]

Oh, that reminds me...

Yes, Panic Room sucked.

Thanks...

[Sukuri]

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Sukuri

It's been over for a couple hours.

[rock, stone]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

And this is a poke at me how? Am I the person calling them "not important"?

See, it isn't a poke at you at all. It is just a response to something you were saying.

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

I think it is very possible you have a communication disorder as you routinely get into arguments where you rage and rage about imagined insults, all the while being incredibly insulting yourself. I seriously have no idea what you are complaining about right now.

Without coming off as picking on SB or being hostile or something else, this is a pretty fair point.

Originally Posted by drbikeshorts

Quote:

Yeah, I'm often on the fence with Fight Club. Whenever I've watched it my opinion has changed. It's often a problem when a film is commenting on the violence it depicts; the message gets lost in the depiction. This is why the film also attracts fans that glorify the violence and think it's cool.
I remember hearing that Pekinpah was disillusioned when he found out people thought he was glorifying violence, when he was really trying to depict the horror of violence.
I'm pretty sure I haven't seen Fight Club since I saw it theatrically and I really couldn't be bothered going back to it.

The first time I saw Fight Club I thought is was okay, and I didn't really like the twist much. But I think the film works so much better knowing the twist. It is one of the few films where I seem to like it the more I see it.

[BasicGreatGuy]

I really enjoyed "Sweet Smell of Success." Detail was very good. It wasn't on the scale of "Paths of Glory," but I interpreted such to the Film Noir style Wong was conveying with the film. The black levels were deep but not overwhelming. There were a few minor scenes (lasting a few seconds) where the focus went a little soft. I attribute that to the intent of the camera. If there was edge enhancement, I didn't see any. I saw no obvious signs of DNR.

The audio was very strong. I was very pleased with the Chico Hamilton Quintet soundtrack. In my opinion, it was perfect dramatic effect all the way through.

Excellent movie and transfer. I have no problem recommending this movie. Well done Criterion.

Originally Posted by RoboDan

Same here. As of now, only have Chungking Express. Will try to pick up a few more before Ran, but once that title hits, I'll be all over it!

I am hoping they decide to take the plunge and start at least releasing all new movies on blu. They just announced The Friends of Eddie Coyle on DVD. Criterion discs aren't cheap and I can't justify paying those kind of prices for DVDs at this point. They also have a bunch of catalouge titles that I'm going to wait out to see if they give them the blu treatment.