The Criterion Collection

[drbikeshorts]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

What could Bergman do better with the concept? Put Bill and Ted in it?

I've got to say, I do love the Seventh Seal reference in Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey.
I haven't seen The Seventh Seal for many years, but I'm thinking of picking it up in my next order.
I remember it being slow and meditative, but never boring.
We need more Max von Sydow films on blu-ray, like Conan the Barbarian

[rkish]

Originally Posted by majorkonig41

Yeah I think so as well. I was just curious to see if I was the only one who didn't like it since I haven't seen any negative reviews or comments about it. Oh well. You can't like them all.

It took three viewings for me to appreciate it. And I haven't come close to seeing as many Bergmans as CCFixx...but of the films that I've seen, it is one of the harder ones to get into on the first viewing.

I agree that Sawdust and Tinsel is a good start for the Bergman novice. The Magician is also a good choice.

[rkish]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Yes, boring. Drudgery. Much like everyday life. And yet it's amazing the lengths we'll go to to stall Death.

Well said Joe...very poignant!

[rkish]

Originally Posted by captveg

Bergman has grown on my over the years, but other than Wild Strawberries the films I saw at first in my early 20s didn't quite engage me the way I expected. Many of his films still don't when I get around to them, but I appreciate the experience anyway. I recently watched The Magician and while I didn't love it I certainly thought there were some fascinating aspects to it. The Seventh Seal is one that I was indifferent to 10 years ago, but now I quite love it. But it did take me until my third viewing to feel that way.

Bergman to me is a combination of an acquired taste and a director for those that "think" and are bright people in general. I'm not trying to put down myself (I'm far from brilliant) or anyone else here, but I think my wife watches, enjoys and "gets" the meaning and symbolism in Bergman films A LOT more quickly and completely than me.

I'm just tired of what Hollywood is producing these days and have wanted to give other avenues of cinema a chance. Bergman has been an enjoyable experience, but can be a lot to swallow at times. I give CCFixx credit in his pilgrimage to view and own all/as many Bergman films as he can.

I personally prefer deep films that are a bit more simple...ergo, my love of directors like Ozu, Naruse, etc. Although I'm a rabid Kubrick fan.

[hollerme]

Originally Posted by nametag

I use axelmusic.com quite a lot, that's probably your best best. Otherwise amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk sellers (sometimes), used to use movietyme.com but their shipping is expensive. Recently I started using blubastard.co.uk - but these are all for delivering to the UK, to Germany there may be other options.

As a sidenote, I recently blind-bought Days of Heaven (and I don't usually blind buy) and have watched it 3 times in the space of about a month. Granted it was mainly to show it to different people, but still. Beautiful film. I've educated myself with Malick through watching The New World, Thin Red Line and now Days of Heaven, in the last couple of months, and am really looking forward to Tree of Life. (I also want to rewatch Badlands as I saw it when I was about 16 and barely remember it). Anyway, when I first started watching Days of Heaven, the first thing I thought was 'omg, Beauty and the Beast'. Seriously, the scores are so similar. Well, those first few notes anyway. (I'm talking about the Disney version here). On looking this up I feel like this similarity has not been noted enough, this is obvious to everyone else, right?

I started using blubastard.com as well thanks to this site and it's been good so far (pleased with Taxi Driver and received Days of Heaven today) but came here to say that they ship to Europe as well (even more intriguing is that delivery to Europe is free just like the UK).

Malick is a wonderful artist whose films have a hypnotic, ethereal quality to them and features some of the most stunning cinematic experiences in the history of film. Personally the shot of John Smith riding towards the camera from afar was in my opinion a reason for why The New World is a true big screen experience. I also can't wait for Tree of Life.

[blkhrt]

Originally Posted by rkish

Bergman to me is a combination of an acquired taste and a director for those that "think" and are bright people in general. I'm not trying to put down myself (I'm far from brilliant) or anyone else here, but I think my wife watches, enjoys and "gets" the meaning and symbolism in Bergman films A LOT more quickly and completely than me.

I'm just tired of what Hollywood is producing these days and have wanted to give other avenues of cinema a chance. Bergman has been an enjoyable experience, but can be a lot to swallow at times. I give CCFixx credit in his pilgrimage to view and own all/as many Bergman films as he can.

I personally prefer deep films that are a bit more simple...ergo, my love of directors like Ozu, Naruse, etc. Although I'm a rabid Kubrick fan.

I'm not sure if that is what you are suggesting, but I would argue that Kubrick's films are quite deep.

[rkish]

Originally Posted by Monty70

I am watching Black Narcissus on BD right now. It is one of my favorite Criterion Blu rays. The Story is timeless, and the cinematography may be some of the best ever done. I actually prefer BN to the Red Shoes. (a fantastic film as well)

PS How could you find the Seventh Seal boring?

I agree with you on this...Black Narcissus is what turned me into an appreciator (is that a word?) of Powell/Pressburger and forced me to take a second and third look at The Red Shoes, as I wasn't "wowed" by it on my first viewing.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Monty70

I am watching Black Narcissus on BD right now. It is one of my favorite Criterion Blu rays. The Story is timeless, and the cinematography may be some of the best ever done. I actually prefer BN to the Red Shoes. (a fantastic film as well)

PS How could you find the Seventh Seal boring?

I will be taking the time to see it this evening, it's been on my DVR for 10 days now, it's too long

As for the Seventh Seal, I can see how it might be boring for some, it's not exactly a movie that can let you put your brain on relax and stop thinking. I do hope like others have said it was not his first Bergman, not exactly the best movie to go with. But I really don't understand this blind buy need of some. For example, Black Narcissus, I never seen the movie...I did not go out and buy the Criterion just because it came out on Blu-ray. I added it to my rental list and actually manage to find it on a classic movie channel. I can now watch it and not need to feel the rage of being pissed off I paied $35 for it as a blind buy if it's not a movie I enjoy. Everyone is different I suppose but I really don't understand blind buy, never will either.

[ShellOilJunior]

A good starting point for Bergman is The Virgin Spring. I hope Criterion has plans for a blu release of it (presumably after Wild Strawberries, of course).

[ShellOilJunior]

White Material:
http://criterionforum.org/DVD-review...collection/817

[rkish]

Originally Posted by Der Spieler

It was a pleasure to revisit The Seventh Seal on Blu. When I first saw it years ago, I thought it was boring, tiresome, fastidious. But seeing it a couple of months ago was a revelation. I was completely moved by this wonderfully executed visual poem.

The theme of the absurdity of a world where God offers no answers is treated magnificently. Antonius Block himself sums it up perfectly: " Faith is a torment. It is like loving someone who is out there in the darkness but never appears, no matter how loudly you call." The movie is stuffed with this dark prose so brilliantly delivered by Max von Sydow.

Max von Sydow "makes" this film and many other by Bergman...just by his presence alone...

I've found that supplements are your best friend with films that take a while to "digest". Commentaries can be a big help and Bergman author and film scholar Peter Cowie does a fantastic one on this film. It really helps with clarification and explanation of the symbolism in the film. Maybe this would be of help to some.

[majorkonig41]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

First of all I know I'm being snappy and I apologize to you all, but I didn't get my nap today.

Blind buy remorse is just a peeve of mine. Honestly, when the most iconic still from a film involves chess and you end up finding that film boring, you really have no one to blame but yourself.

From the OP's post it seemed obvious to me he'd blind-bought. But my point was an expression of amazement that blind-buying is such a widely accepted practice despite being kind of stupid. I mean, we all do it to an extent -- a $10 ticket to a movie here, a $5 DVD there -- but a $30 Blu-ray?

And then it sits on the shelf until you can clear out 2 hours weeks later...or months later...in your busy schedule to watch it? Why the rush to buy it, then? It's just alien to me. When I do blind-buy a DVD/BD (for more than $5), it's because I want to see it now rather than waiting for Netflix to get it or whatever. To each their own.

I do applaud the OP for at least taking a chance on something of quality based on reviews, word-of-mouth and reputation, though. In that sense I feel bad for ragging on him.

I had a gift card given to me as a birthday present, so to me, blind buying a $30 blu ray with a gift card isn't a big deal. Since I'm essentially getting it for free. I don't have buyers remorse. I am glad I watched it. I was just curious what the big deal about it was in everyone's opinion.

And while I also like watching a movie right after buying it, sometimes this thing called life gets in the way and you put off watching the movie until the right time to enjoy it.

[rkish]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

I'm not sure if that is what you are suggesting, but I would argue that Kubrick's films are quite deep.

I'm not trying to suggest that Kubrick films are as "deep" as a Bergman film, but I think Kubrick's films are less "simple" than films by directors such as Naruse and Ozu.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by rkish

Bergman to me is a combination of an acquired taste and a director for those that "think" and are bright people in general. I'm not trying to put down myself (I'm far from brilliant) or anyone else here, but I think my wife watches, enjoys and "gets" the meaning and symbolism in Bergman films A LOT more quickly and completely than me.

Here's the thing about your statement, rkish... as much as I love the films of Ingmar Bergman, I don't view any of his films as an exercise in "thinking." I don't approach his films with the notion that I really have to pay attention or else I'm not going to "get it," ya know? Maybe, I should be thinking about them, but I don't think Ingmar Bergman set out to create "deep, philosophical" films.

I think for most of the classic film directors that made an impression in film, the audience, generally speaking, tries to find a "meaning" to justify the film's existence and importance. I try not to view films that way. That would make the films a bore and a chore for me to watch.

There's not one Bergman film that I have watched in which I don't see one or two of Bergman's key ingredients... 1) humiliation of man, or 2) the questioning of man's existence amongst the faith & religion in the world. It's these two ingredients that I can easily identify with so that could be why his films are so easily digested by me. If you can relate to either of those themes, I think you'll find the films of Bergman to be sad, yet comedic, and easy to appreciate. It's just a matter of identifying and relating and, obviously, not everyone relates to the same things in life.

CC

[rkish]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

Here's the thing about your statement, rkish... as much as I love the films of Ingmar Bergman, I don't view any of his films as an exercise in "thinking." I don't approach his films with the notion that I really have to pay attention or else I'm not going to "get it," ya know? Maybe, I should be thinking about them, but I don't think Ingmar Bergman set out to create "deep, philosophical" films.

I think for most of the classic film directors that made an impression in film, the audience, generally speaking, tries to find a "meaning" to justify the film's existence and importance. I try not to view films that way. That would make the films a bore and a chore for me to watch.

There's not one Bergman film that I haven't watched in which I don't see one or two of Bergman's key ingredients... 1) humiliation of man, or 2) the questing of man's existence amongst the faith & religion in the world. It's these two ingredients that I can easily identify with so that could be why his films are so easily digested by me. If you can relate to either of those themes, I think you'll find the films of Bergman to be sad, yet comedic, and easy to appreciate. It's just a matter of identifying and relating and, obviously, not everyone relates to the same things in life.

CC

Thanks for sharing that CC...I guess that I'm not too different from you. That is how I try to go into any film that I watch. I think my wife needs to "know what's going on" and will try to look at the symbolism in films that she has any interest in. She was keen to that in Antichrist and "had it figured out" long before I did. Maybe I've got to stop watching films with her.

Bergman was raised in a fairly religious enviroment, hence his repeated inclusion of it as a theme in his films. I was raised as a Catholic in much the same way, so that theme in his films is something that I can certainly relate to.

Thanks again for taking the time to give me your own personal insight.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

Here's the thing about your statement, rkish... as much as I love the films of Ingmar Bergman, I don't view any of his films as an exercise in "thinking." I don't approach his films with the notion that I really have to pay attention or else I'm not going to "get it," ya know? Maybe, I should be thinking about them, but I don't think Ingmar Bergman set out to create "deep, philosophical" films.

I think for most of the classic film directors that made an impression in film, the audience, generally speaking, tries to find a "meaning" to justify the film's existence and importance. I try not to view films that way. That would make the films a bore and a chore for me to watch.

There's not one Bergman film that I haven't watched in which I don't see one or two of Bergman's key ingredients... 1) humiliation of man, or 2) the questioning of man's existence amongst the faith & religion in the world. It's these two ingredients that I can easily identify with so that could be why his films are so easily digested by me. If you can relate to either of those themes, I think you'll find the films of Bergman to be sad, yet comedic, and easy to appreciate. It's just a matter of identifying and relating and, obviously, not everyone relates to the same things in life.

CC

CC, that is not only well put for Bergman, but many directors that are perceived as 'important.' I have not seen 28 Bergman's as you have, but I have viewed most of his offerings several times and I agree he is not one to 'look' for a meaning. When I started on Bergman years ago, I too did not 'understand' what he was trying to get at. That is why reading up on and supplements are a must for 1st and 2nd time viewers of not only Bergman, but many of the so called 'important' directors. The concept of film should be an experience and not a case study ever time. Maybe it's just my 'literature' side, but reading up on the directors is just as enjoyable as watching their creations. I try to never 'blind buy' a film, unless I have a small piece of the background. I see many of these 'blind buy' posts in this thread, as Criterion selections are typically not an easy pill to swallow. I will say though, reading a review and then 'looking' for meaning in the film is a waste of time. IMO, simply understanding the foundations of the director before viewing any of his/her films should give you enough 'meaning' so that when you do watch one of their films, its not a film study, but rather, an enjoyable experience.

[ShellOilJunior]

One of my pet peeves with film criticism is perceived symbolism.

I had an argument with someone on IMDB over Hitchcock's Under Capricorn. I maintained that it was a weak Hitchcock offering. He loved the film and said it was because of the rich symbolism in the film (ie. its paintings far, far in the background of some scenes. I thought the film was still dull.

It's like when a critic asked Welles why the girl in a shop in Touch of Evil was blind--- what's the symbolism? Welles remarked there was none and he did it because he felt like it.

[Yami]

I hope we get upgrades announced on Friday, I'd like some Orson Welles or Rossellini's War Trilogy.

[blkhrt]

Originally Posted by Yami

I hope we get upgrades announced on Friday, I'd like some Orson Welles or Rossellini's War Trilogy.

I would imagine there will be some upgrades this month since there weren't any last month. I have been listening the Passion of Joan of Arc soundtrack this morning, hoping it will be announced.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

One of my pet peeves with film criticism is perceived symbolism.

I had an argument with someone on IMDB over Hitchcock's Under Capricorn. I maintained that it was a weak Hitchcock offering. He loved the film and said it was because of the rich symbolism in the film (ie. it's paintings far, far in the background of some scenes. I thought the film was still dull.

It's like when a critic asked Welles why the girl in a shop in Touch of Evil was blind--- what's the symbolism? Welles remarked there was none and he did it because he felt like it.

Great art works on many levels and can be interpreted many ways. Sometimes even in ways that baffle the creators. And sometimes, the creators will deny their actual motivations. (Although sometimes there truly aren't any.) I used to be a recording engineer and in the mid-1970s recorded an interview between the New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael and Alfred Hitchcock a few years before he died. She kept on pushing him to reveal meaning behind a certain scene and he kept denying there was any meaning whatsoever, just like Welles did in your example. Hitchcock actually got very frustrated with Kael - it was actually pretty funny.

As for those who don't like The Seventh Seal, I suggest they watch Woody Allen's "Love and Death" as a "primer".