The Criterion Collection

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by Darkcritic

Something more recent I want Criterion to release is Rossellini's War Trilogy. I may be getting confused but I think this one got released not many years ago in DVD, in fact, I believe Criterion already were putting out BDs...

When Criterion released the magnificent DVD set, I'm pretty sure it was mentioned that Criterion didn't think the materials were up-to-snuff for a blu-ray release. Also, their price-point for releasing the War Trilogy on blu-ray might've been too high that Criterion didn't think enough copies would sell to justify the expense.

[jrmac2000]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Whoa, i just discovered that Terrence Malick, who seems to be a Criterion darling to most of this board, worked on the script of Drive, He Said, a film most posters seem to hate, although not as much as A Safe Place.

I just watched Drive, He Said last night and I thought is was a decent film for a first time director. Is it something I would watch repeatedly? No, but when ever I feel like going through the BBS box again I would certainly watch it along with rest of the films in there.

[lildemon666]

Since we are getting re-releases of films allready on bd do you think we might get criterion to release Hard Boiled, The Killer, This is Spinal Tap, Do the right thing and other films we have on bd but not from criterion.?

[jrmac2000]

Originally Posted by lildemon666

Since we are getting re-releases of films allready on bd do you think we might get criterion to release Hard Boiled, The Killer, This is Spinal Tap, Do the right thing and other films we have on bd but not from criterion.?

There is always hope for this, but the only one you listed that is still in print on DVD is Do the Right Thing. I believe it is the only one with a shot to be re-issued at the moment. If the rights to the others come back to Criterion then I would be willing to bet they would be high on the re-release chart. But that is a big If.

[BluPops]

Then I think you have to ask yourself WHY you have a hard time with b&w, mono, 4:3, etc.

To be honest, I don't understand it when people have a hard time watching something older than them (or the now 34yr old Star Wars!). It's just a movie. Just watch it! It'll be good! You'll have a good time!
Sure, people will have different hair styles, clothes, speaking patterns, and the style of storytelling is a bit different, but it's not from another planet!

Remember that these films were made in the 1930's 40's, 50's, 60's etc. BEFORE other films, technology etc.

Stagecoach is a classic. One of the first, if not the first of that type of film. It's very good. Rusty in parts, but very good. I'm not the biggest Stagecoach fan (since I prefer Grand Hotel to it), but I certainly won't knock it (hey, I own it!). Just don't do like some and say "it's like Love Boat".

Originally Posted by bentvalve

I was just trying to say that I have a hard time appreciating black and white, the tiny 4:3 image, mono sound, etc. .......I guess I just gotta watch it, after all it is THE western that gave the genre its start, no? it can't be that difficult to enjoy. I think I heard either Steven Spielberg or George Lucas once say that Ford was a director's director, in other words Ford basically helped make them better directors.

[BluPops]

Yeah, what's up with that?

"I don't want to watch an old movie"
and I say in reply "so, you'd rather watch some crappy new thing?"

Oy....

Originally Posted by drbikeshorts

However, my wife and some friends get very distracted by a film's age.
As for Stagecoach,

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by jrmac2000

I just watched Drive, He Said last night and I thought is was a decent film for a first time director. Is it something I would watch repeatedly? No, but when ever I feel like going through the BBS box again I would certainly watch it along with rest of the films in there.

He didn't direct, Jack Nicholson did.

I made a smart-arsed remark regarding Malick since a lot of people seem to worship him on here, yet hate the film Drive, He Said.

Personally I thought it was decent, 6.5/10, but not something I'd watch monthly.

[jrmac2000]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

He didn't direct, Jack Nicholson did.

I made a smart-arsed remark regarding Malick since a lot of people seem to worship him on here, yet hate the film Drive, He Said.

Personally I thought it was decent, 6.5/10, but not something I'd watch monthly.

Yes, I know it was Nicholson directing. I should have made that clearer, sorry about that. It was however, Jack's first directing gig.

[Banned User]

Recieved everything I ordered from Deep Discount and B&N all in perfect condition. Then Friday I swung by B&N and picked up 'The Music Room'. Like always I glanced over the whole package for defects before purchasing. Got home and removed the plastic wrap and under the big square Barnes and Noble price tag is a nice size tear in the cover art. I hate stuff like that it drives me crazy. Or more crazy

I know some people say big deal the disc still works, but when I buy something new I expect it to be new. If I were to ebay this I would have to list it as having a damaged case which will affect the final price. Not that I will list it. Just venting.

[Matt24734]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Whoa, i just discovered that Terrence Malick, who seems to be a Criterion darling to most of this board, worked on the script of Drive, He Said, a film most posters seem to hate, although not as much as A Safe Place.

Malick's worked on a TON of scripts throughout his career with a lot going uncredited and under the radar, I don't really think about that in association with HIS films which are all masterpieces including The Tree of Life.

[scottpcusa]

My next anticipated Criterion BD is Secret Sunshine. I've never seen it, but I am intrigued by the story and the theme. Has anyone seen it? I wish it was available on Netflix or Hulu or iTunes or something! I would love to hear thoughts from anyone who has seen it.

[BohemianGraham]

Having a mini-discussion of sorts over in the 50% off sale thread, but does anyone else have both Gimme Shelter and The Complete Monterey Pop? I watched them in chronological order (concert dates that is) and found Gimme Shelter to be pretty bleak and depressing after Monterey. It was still highly enjoyable, but you could really see the changes from 1967 to 1969. Anyone else feel the same way?

[blkhrt]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Having a mini-discussion of sorts over in the 50% off sale thread, but does anyone else have both Gimme Shelter and The Complete Monterey Pop? I watched them in chronological order (concert dates that is) and found Gimme Shelter to be pretty bleak and depressing after Monterey. It was still highly enjoyable, but you could really see the changes from 1967 to 1969. Anyone else feel the same way?

Yes and yes. I think you could argue that there is a clear cultural shift going on in between the two films. Of course, for many Altamont signaled the end of the 1960's.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

Yes and yes. I think you could argue that there is a clear cultural shift going on in between the two films. Of course, for many Altamont signaled the end of the 1960's.

"Monterey was the wedding, Woodstock the divorce and Altamont the funeral."

I think it is an appropriate quote. I knew that Altamont was a huge failure, and all of the issues surround it, but actually seeing it on film really struck me as to how bad it really was. I found it particularly interesting as to how they showed the footage to Jagger and we were able to see his reaction to it.

I wasn't even born until the mid-1980s, but it's still such a noticable shift. It's the same with the SDS splintering off into the more militant factions such as the Weathermen. It's the same with Woodstock and Festival Express, those two festivals are much darker than Monterey. I still need to own Woodstock though, but I have seen it.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by BluPops

Then I think you have to ask yourself WHY you have a hard time with b&w, mono, 4:3, etc.

To be honest, I don't understand it when people have a hard time watching something older than them (or the now 34yr old Star Wars!). It's just a movie. Just watch it! It'll be good! You'll have a good time!
Sure, people will have different hair styles, clothes, speaking patterns, and the style of storytelling is a bit different, but it's not from another planet!

Remember that these films were made in the 1930's 40's, 50's, 60's etc. BEFORE other films, technology etc.

Stagecoach is a classic. One of the first, if not the first of that type of film. It's very good. Rusty in parts, but very good. I'm not the biggest Stagecoach fan (since I prefer Grand Hotel to it), but I certainly won't knock it (hey, I own it!). Just don't do like some and say "it's like Love Boat".

I have to admit 4:3 does kind of bother me. Maybe it wouldn't if I had huge a projector screen, but on a 40" television it makes the image a little small. But obviously you just have to look past that for anything before the 50's and 60's.

B&W on the other hand is not an issue at all, some films look SPECTACULAR in B&W and it's impossible to even imagine them in color.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Yeah, in 1967

[Show spoiler]people weren't getting beaten up and stabbed by bikers at pop concerts

.

Well, Duh. The whole point of the conversation was to see how a well received, almost perfect concert in 1967, evolved into one as terrible as the one in 1969. Why were

[Show spoiler]people getting beaten up and stabbed by bikers at pop concerts

in 1969, and not in 1967? Also, Woostock seems a bit disenchanting compared to Monterey as well. The concerts are only just examples of the total change overall with the counterculture and society in general. I really feel that they show how much had changed in that short 2 year period.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

I have to admit 4:3 does kind of bother me. Maybe it wouldn't if I had huge a projector screen, but on a 40" television it makes the image a little small. But obviously you just have to look past that for anything before the 50's and 60's.

My question is what did you do before the common place of 16:9 HD televisions? How were you viewing movies on a 4:3 tv that were in a wider aspect ratio? Or, are you too young to fully grasp what it was like watching VHS "widescreen" movies on a 4:3 ratio television? Also, how do you currently handle 2.35:1 ratio movies on your 1.77:1 ratio television screen? You're still not filling up your screen with a 2.35:1 film, similar to a 4:3 film. So, are the side bars more bothersome to you than the black bars being above and below a film?

[Abitante Notte]

Any news of Criterion releasing Grey Gardens/The Beales of Grey Gardens on Blu-Ray?

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by Abitante Notte

Any news of Criterion releasing Grey Gardens/The Beales of Grey Gardens on Blu-Ray?

No news as of yet. Are you itching to see the Edies in all their HD glory?

[Strevlac]

Very dissapointed but not at all surprised to hear that High & Low is overly sharpened. I love Criterion but I can't fathom why they keep doing this to so many of their B&W movies. They DNR then re-sharpen and contrast boost the heck out of them. Drives me crazy.