The Criterion Collection

[JediFonger]

i don't think i've seen any other bergman films either... but 7S was good enough for me to want to get everything of his... eventually.

eventually, when i actually sit down& start watching the content, hahahah

do you feel like bergman meant for 7S to be a 'satire' in its day?

[Cocophone]

I enjoyed "I've Loved You So" even with what most would say is slow pacing, so I would say that slow pacing is something I enjoy.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

Just for you...



I know Godard was a fan of early Bergman, but has he ever commented on Bergman after he made such the bold statement?




Of course, anyone can say the very same things about Bergman's films, and it's okay. It's all personal taste.

CC

What's ironic CC, is I always though Bergman was much more 'pretentious' than Godard could ever be. Which I believe is the opposite of what most people think.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

"Godard is a f**king bore. He's made his films for the critics." - Ingmar Bergman

I know Godard was a fan of early Bergman, but has he ever commented on Bergman after he made such the bold statement?

Godard would never do such a thing.

Bergman was a judge at the Venice Film Festival the year of Hopper's Last Movie and said "The 1st time a director dealt with the responsibility of the magical apparatus of a film". So he had good comments too.

[majorkonig41]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

See, now this is where your interpretation, or misinterpretation, of the film has caused it to fail for you. It could be because you've read, and heard, so much BS over the years about the film that there's no way this particular film could live up to your mind's imagined hype of what this film is supposed to be. I know you found "The Seventh Seal" to be a bore, but I think it partly has to do with your trying to find some kind of "meaning" in the film.

Have you ever checked out this page... Ingmar Bergman's Universe? It's the official Bergman site that covers just about everything you could possible want to know about the man and his films.

CC

I don't know if what I have read caused me to have some sort of expectation in terms of the meaning or what the film was supposed to be because when I read about a film I don't read too much of the plot synopsis or what the reviewers personal thoughts are. I mainly skim the review and then watch the film and form my own opinion. I try not to get expectations up. Then again its somewhat inevitable with a film with a reputation like this one.

[majorkonig41]

Originally Posted by jcs913

Never a reason to apologize, as you should have offended no one. You spoke your mind and backed up your reasoning as best as you can. What I am referring to is when others have no concrete idea why it was boring or they did not find meaning. Usually those posts are because people think plot has everything to do with the film being interesting. That is when the post becomes pointless to me.

As I have stated before: before you blind bought the film, did you look into it? If so, and you still found it boring, maybe look into it further. You may like what you find, then again, you may be totally turned away, which is fine too. I can use the old analogy about any purchase; before buying a car or blu-ray player, etc.. did you research it? Then honestly, why not do that for a $40 (msrp) purchase? That is all I was getting at. That always seems to make sense to me...

I did look into it a bit. I was interested and like I said before I had a gift card so the blind buy was essentially a free blind buy. I plan on watching it again down the road. There have been many movies that I now hold dear to me that the first time I saw I hated. I think it all depends on where you are in life. I hope the next time I give it a go I will enjoy it more.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by jcs913

What's ironic CC, is I always though Bergman was much more 'pretentious' than Godard could ever be. Which I believe is the opposite of what most people think.

+1, Bergman is pretentious. Bergman's comment about Godard shows it. Godard played with film. His films show comedy. Something Bergman lacked. Bergman couldn't look past his high-art snob views to see that Godard was a satire to the Bergman type (or maybe he did know that and that is why he disliked him. From Fear of the younger Godard/Antonioni). It shows now that Godard doesn't care about "film" in general rather just the issues of which came to his mind he filmed. Godard and pretentious are words that shouldn't be together and are only thrown together when someone who knows crap about Godard's films likes to stick him with other "art" directors like a beginner does just off of names and can't sit through them.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

+1, Bergman is pretentious. Bergman's comment about Godard shows it. Godard played with film. His films show comedy. Something Bergman lacked. Bergman couldn't look past his high-art snob views to see that Godard was a satire to the Bergman type. It shows now that Godard doesn't care about "film" in general rather just the issues of which came to his mind. Godard and pretentious are words that shouldn't be together and are only thrown together when someone who knows crap about Godard's films likes to stick him with other "art" directors like a beginner does just off of names and can't sit through them.

Could it be perception? I hope I wrote that right? What I mean is, I was reading you post and it does make sense but it could be who or how it's being said. It could well be that Godard saying something, people listen and all they hear and think he is a douche. Bergman say the same thing and people listen and all they see and hear he is so intellectual? It may well be Bergman was better at selling himself then Godard. Don't get me wrong of cause I find they are both sort of arrogant in their own personal way but any person or artist with a certain level of talent will have that arrogance about himself, or so I believe anyway. I could be wrong.

[ShellOilJunior]

I like Bergman, Welles and Godard. Imagine that!


Also, I know this site is in love with Inception but upon a second viewing I found it shallow and vapid. The fact it spends so much time explaining kills its replay value for me. It also thinks it's a lot more clever than it actually is---- please don't explain every detail because it discourages thinking.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Could it be perception? I hope I wrote that right? What I mean is, I was reading you post and it does make sense but it could be who or how it's being said. For example, even here how sometime people sort of missunderstand you posts. It could well be that Godard saying something, people listen and all they hear and think he is a douche. Bergman say the same thing and people listen and all they see and hear he is so intellectual? It may well be Bergman was better at selling himself then Godard. Don't get me wrong of cause I find they are both sort of arrogant in their own personal way but any person or artist with a certain level of talent will have that arrogance about himself, or so I believe anyway. I could be wrong.

I never like the word pretentious anyways and have always said there isn't a such thing as a pretentious film. Though, yes there are douches. It could be perception, you're right.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I like Bergman, Welles and Godard. Imagine that!


Also, I know this site is in love with Inception but upon a second viewing I found it shallow and vapid. The fact it spends so much time explaining kills its replay value for me. It also thinks it's a lot more clever than it actually is---- please don't explain every detail because it discourages thinking.

I think too many people fall in love way to quickly with movies on this site It goes from movie to movie as they are release but anyway I get in trouble when I say this so I will stop.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

I never like the word pretentious anyways and have always said there isn't a such thing as a pretentious film. Though, yes there are douches. It could be perception, you're right.

I made a change on my post, I did not want you or others to think I was saying you are a douche, I realise after the way I wrote the phrase. I will get better in English I hope one day

[rkish]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

I made a change on my post, I did not want you or others to think I was saying you are a douche, I realise after the way I wrote the phrase. I will get better in English I hope one day

That's OK Pat! We're ALL douches! SB just has the guts to not let it bother him and he doesn't care what others think. It's "his" opinion, just like what you wrote is "your" opinion.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

I never like the word pretentious anyways and have always said there isn't a such thing as a pretentious film. Though, yes there are douches. It could be perception, you're right.

CG, I think pretentious is in the eye of the beholder, as by definition it is a word that implies someone is demanding importance. I think most people imply a person as pretentious and not a film. I truly believe that, as artists, directors are all pretentious, as they are trying to show the world the importance of their piece of art. If they didn't believe it was important, they probably would have never made it. Some directors are just a little more, by definition, than others...

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by rkish

That's OK Pat! We're ALL douches! SB just has the guts to not let it bother him and he doesn't care what others think. It's "his" opinion, just like what you wrote is "your" opinion.

Oh I know SB is a hard cookie He does let anything bother him.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by jcs913

CG, I think pretentious is in the eye of the beholder, as by definition it is a word that implies someone is demanding importance. I think most people imply a person as pretentious and not a film. I truly believe that, as artists, directors are all pretentious, as they are trying to show the world the importance of their piece of art. If they didn't believe it was important, they probably would have never made it. Some directors are just a little more, by definition, than others...

That what I was trying to say when I mention arrogance. If you look at any artist who as reach a certain level they all have a sort something about that them can either be call arrogance or pretentious. I suppose athletes have that as well in a way. In turn any person in any field can have that same thing, doctors, lawyers, firemen.....if you achieve something in your life it's because you work hard at it and you are proud of what you did. Artist just have it plashed out in interviews and to a much more larger audience then the rest of us.

[rkish]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Oh I know SB is a hard cookie He does let anything bother him.

I'd hate to take a bite outta him!

[jhiggy23]

Criterion posted a photo and write-up about Monica Vitti on their facebook page not too long ago. There's no way it was simply random, which leads me to believe that Friday will include an announcement of either La Notte, Eclisse, or L'Avventura upgraded. Thoughts?

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

I made a change on my post, I did not want you or others to think I was saying you are a douche, I realise after the way I wrote the phrase. I will get better in English I hope one day

I didn't think you were calling me a D. That was fine.

Originally Posted by rkish

That's OK Pat! We're ALL douches! SB just has the guts to not let it bother him and he doesn't care what others think. It's "his" opinion, just like what you wrote is "your" opinion.

Some stuff bothers me, but yeah, I don't take what I say or what others say seriously on here anyways, because the end of the day, it's about movies. So with that in mind, I just say what I want about whatever because I know I shouldn't hurt anybody on here saying I dislike a movie or really like one.

Originally Posted by jcs913

CG, I think pretentious is in the eye of the beholder, as by definition it is a word that implies someone is demanding importance. I think most people imply a person as pretentious and not a film. I truly believe that, as artists, directors are all pretentious, as they are trying to show the world the importance of their piece of art. If they didn't believe it was important, they probably would have never made it. Some directors are just a little more, by definition, than others...

You're right. I was just seeing it as either nothing is pretentious or everything is. I went with nothing is, but your "every director is" sounds better.

Originally Posted by rkish

I'd hate to take a bite outta him!

You can all just bite me!

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Criterion posted a photo and write-up about Monica Vitti on their facebook page not too long ago. There's no way it was simply random, which leads me to believe that Friday will include an announcement of either La Notte, Eclisse, or L'Avventura upgraded. Thoughts?

Bergman thought she sucked as an actress. But the way I see it, she wasn't trying to "perform" in a method in the Antonioni films anyways. Yet another Bergman comment that showed he didn't understand something. Give me a screen presence over an "actor" anyday.

With that said, looks to be a L'Avventura upgrade, which is fine by me.


Newsletter coming today as well. Prob not a clue one.