The Criterion Collection

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by drbikeshorts

I learnt something today. I'd never heard of this so-called Mumblecore genre.

This forum was the first place I had heard of it too, which is why I looked it up - definitely curious.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Kalekulan

I'm gonna stop reading Blu-ray.com's reviews of Criterion releases. They are ALWAYS giving out atleast 4.5 (more often 5) to the movie, video and audio when it's clearly not worth it. It's very disappointing to see how this site is getting bribed or whatever.

Although I can understand some people taking issues with the film's overall rating (everybody's entitled to their opinion on a film), what Criterion release did you think was subpar as far as VQ and AQ? I can't really think of many. I think people have said The Last Emperor was disappointing, but that's the only complaint I've ever heard.

Criterion do tremendous work.

[DionJP]

Originally Posted by Kalekulan

I'm gonna stop reading Blu-ray.com's reviews of Criterion releases. They are ALWAYS giving out atleast 4.5 (more often 5) to the movie, video and audio when it's clearly not worth it. It's very disappointing to see how this site is getting bribed or whatever.

This is just simply not true. As far as I know, Hunger and The Seventh Seal are the only Criterion's to get a perfect video rating.

And I don't think I have read such an ignorant statement. Please do us all a favor, and stop posting in this thread.


Anyways, Beta Man! you need to update the second post in this thread my man.

[duggie walker]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

I was going to ask if 'The Rules of the Game' is worth a blind-buy, but I suppose the overwhelming consensus will undoubtedly be 'yes', won't it?

Actually - whilst it's unlikely that you'll hate it as a movie - there's every chance you'd be indifferent to it; even slightly bemused by many peoples' contention that it's The Greatest Film Ever Made.

I've only seen it once, admittedly, but it didn't knock me sideways. It's certainly worth seeing but if you can catch it in a decent print without buying the Criterion then go for it. I've ordered the BD myself so I'll be giving it another watch to see if I appreciate it any more with the benefit of age.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Kalekulan

I'm gonna stop reading Blu-ray.com's reviews of Criterion releases. They are ALWAYS giving out atleast 4.5 (more often 5) to the movie, video and audio when it's clearly not worth it. It's very disappointing to see how this site is getting bribed or whatever.

What? I can think of quite a few reviews where the film, audio, and video got less than 4.5. How many of them have you read? Obviously you just don't like the type of movies Criterion puts out, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Films with less than 4.5:
Rushmore
Kuroneko
Dazed and Confused
Identification of a Woman
The Four Feathers
Life During Wartime
Black Moon
The Great Dictator
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
The Times of Harvey Milk
Topsy Turvy
Robinson Crusoe on Mars
Videodrome
Cronos
Hausu
The Darjeeling Limited
Charade
Close Up
Ride With the Devil
Sanjuro
Gimme Shelter
Monsoon Wedding
Kagemusha
Repulsion
The Last Metro

Video Quality with less than 4.5:
Three Colors Trilogy
Island of Lost Souls
Dazed and Confused
The Four Feathers
3 Women
High and Low
Beauty and the Beast
Zazie dans le metro
Black Moon
Solaris
Fat Girl
Something Wild
Diabolique
Sweetie
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Le Cercel Rouge
Topsy Turvy
Au revoir les enfants
The Mikado
Yi Yi
Amarcord
Shock Corridor
Naked Kiss
Robinson Crusoe on Mars
Army of Shadows
Videodrome
Antichrist
Charade
Breathless
Black Orpheus
The Secret of the Grain
Black Narcissus
Close Up
Stagecoach
By Brakhage: An Anthology, Volumes One and Two
Sanjuro
8 1/2
Gimme Shelter
Kagemusha
The Wages of Fear
El Norte

Audio Quality with less than 4.5:
Island of Lost Souls
Identification of a Woman
The Four Feathers
High and Low
My Life as a Dog
The Music Room
Kiss Me Deadly
Insignificance
Smiles of a Summer Night
Solaris
Diabolique
Le Cercle Rouge
The Mikado
Sweet Smell of Success
Fish Tank
Shock Corridor
Naked Kiss
Robinson Crusoe on Mars
Cronos
Modern Times
Antichrist
Hausu
The Darjeeling Limited
Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence
Breathless
Black Orpheus
Crumb
Black Narcissus
Everlasting Moments
Close Up
Mystery Train
Stagecoach
By Brakhage: An Anthology, Volumes One and Two
Walkabout
8 1/2
A Christmas Tale
Pierrot le fou
Kagemusha
Playtime
El Norte
Bottle Rocket

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by RojD

And another topic: Does anyone know what happens to the Criterion remasters when Criterion's rights to the film lapse? Does the company that reclaims the rights buy the remaster or does it do a new one?

As far as I know, if Criterion commissions for a new master of a film then they're going to own that master. Off the top of my head, I think of all the recent Ozu blu-rays that have been released by BFI in the UK. A lot of their masters for the films came from Criterion, and I imagine that BFI has to pay Criterion some kind of money for such a thing. The same thing would apply to all of the Criterion-created special features on their releases. If the film-owning company were to put out their own release and wanted to use Criterion's special features then the company that owns the film would have to pay Criterion for the use of those feature.

Originally Posted by RojD

Put another way, is Third Man blu on Lionsgate the same remaster as in the Third Man blu on CC? Since there's a digibook version of Le Samourai coming out in France, if CC releases Le Samourai here, will it be the same remaster?

Simply put, the masters are probably the same but it's a widely known fact that Criterion does their own in-house tinkering with a master once it has been digitized. You can easily compare the same films released by Masters Of Cinema and Criterion and notice that there's a difference in the final product. Criterion is a much larger company with more funding than MOC, so Criterion has more means to manipulate to what they feel is the best presentation for home video viewing. MOC, on the other hand, are limited to using the transfers that are provided to them without manipulation because MOC doesn't have the funding or as many resources as Criterion to make any changes.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by Kalekulan

I'm gonna stop reading Blu-ray.com's reviews of Criterion releases. They are ALWAYS giving out at least 4.5 (more often 5) to the movie, video and audio when it's clearly not worth it. It's very disappointing to see how this site is getting bribed or whatever.

All of Criterion's reviews are written by one person on this site. If the reviewer happens to enjoy Criterion's output and how they handle their releases, then so be it. It's easily understand that not everyone's opinions and tastes in things are in agreement. Reviews are subjective and ONE person's opinion. If that opinion doesn't agree with your opinion, then so what? It's not the end of the world. I'm not sure what you're disappointed in, though. I highly doubt that pro-b is bribed by Criterion or any other companies for his foreign release reviews. Personally, after reading his reviews for so long, I thought for sure he'd like Terry Gilliams' Tideland... but, he didn't. It didn't upset me or cause me to lose sleep, though.

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by Kalekulan

I'm gonna stop reading Blu-ray.com's reviews of Criterion releases. They are ALWAYS giving out atleast 4.5 (more often 5) to the movie, video and audio when it's clearly not worth it. It's very disappointing to see how this site is getting bribed or whatever.

Really? You are going to complain about the quality of titles?

[Pyoko]

The video transfers (disregarding newer films from digital intermediates) on Criterion's discs vary in quality just as much as any major studio's, except Universal(ly rubbish). Sometimes they're less great due to using an older master, or because they didn't have access to the films to do their own transfers, sometimes they're perfectly adequate, sometimes they're amazing. Personally I find it pretty useless to practically only rate 4-5 when there's such a wide range of quality on display, but whatever.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

The video transfers (disregarding newer films from digital intermediates) on Criterion's discs vary in quality just as much as any major studio's, except Universal(ly rubbish). Sometimes they're less great due to using an older master, or because they didn't have access to the films to do their own transfers, sometimes they're perfectly adequate, sometimes they're amazing. Personally I find it pretty useless to practically only rate 4-5 when there's such a wide range of quality on display, but whatever.

To me 5* PQ reviews should be reserved for reference discs only, although to my knowledge there aren't particularly many Criterion discs that received 5* PQ anyway. Perhaps a few of the transfers should have been in the 3* range that received 4*? I certainly don't think too many Criterion discs would need to use the whole scale, and go down to 1* or 2*. Not based on what I've seen anyway...Criterion seems to pull out a decent 3* or 4* even when working with the most challenging materials (again, just based on what I've seen on blu-ray so far).

As to the rating of the films themselves. I'm sure I would also disagree with a few of them receiving 4*+ ratings, however in general most every title Criterion puts out is also rated high on places like RottenTomatoes and IMDB. So really they are pretty much in line with the "concensus" in rating these as great films. Individuals are always free to disagree with the consensus opinion, I've hated many "critically adored" films. But professional reviewers rarely will, at least not in something they are publishing. Something about maintaining credibility or some such nonsense...

[*DrStrangelove*]

Just saw Paths of Glory. What an amazing film and the pq was phenomenal. Im definatley picking up The Killing now before the sale ends. This is now my favorite Criterion (that I have seen). So far all the Criterions I've seen have been outstanding (Paths of Glory, Repulsion, Vivre Sa Vie, Pierrot Le Fou, Breathless). Still got a couple more I haven't seen plus I'm going to BN tomorrow to pick some more up. I'm like obsessed with Criterions now. I don't even wanna watch anything that's not Criterion anymore!

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

I've hated many "critically adored" films. But professional reviewers rarely will, at least not in something they are publishing. Something about maintaining credibility or some such nonsense...

BR.com used to have a guy that laid into some pretty popular films. The review that stomped on one of my favorites, LA Confidential was one of the ones I recall reading and thinking that I didn't agree with the reviewer in all aspects, but I thought he had some pretty fair points. Quite a few other members didn't think the reviewer had valid points and complained (one of the complaints was that he went against the consensus), and that reviewer and his reviews are no longer posted on this site. Draw your own conclusions.

[Sukuri]

on the subject of best/worst cover.

best: three colour trilogy (specifically blue)
worst: the great dictator

[alexvega]

Anyone know where i can get a replacement case for the night of the hunter? Thanks.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by alexvega

Anyone know where i can get a replacement case for the night of the hunter? Thanks.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

Send an e-mail to the Jon Mulvaney address that Criterion has listed on their site.

[fdm]

Can't recall which I voted for best cover, probably Sweet Smell Of Success, but the two worst covers were Naked Kiss and Shock Corridor, so I picked one of those.

Edit: Suspect I actually voted for Design For Living as best cover. And probably for Naked Kiss as the worst (since I prefer it film-wise).

[greekak229]

Originally Posted by DionJP

This is just simply not true. As far as I know, Hunger and The Seventh Seal are the only Criterion's to get a perfect video rating.

And I don't think I have read such an ignorant statement. Please do us all a favor, and stop posting in this thread.


Anyways, Beta Man! you need to update the second post in this thread my man.

The Thin Red Line is another perfect rating one, that I can recall. Either way, I agree with what you said.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by plattopus

The thing that shits me about that article is that he offers no proof that 1.33:1 is the correct ratio, he just believes it is, and then makes all kinds of wild guesses as to why Criterion would use the "wrong" aspect ratio.


He's decided that Criterion must have purposely and knowingly used the wrong aspect ratio for reasons of laziness, but has no proof whatsoever. Even if 1.85:1 turns out to be the incorrect aspect ratio, I'm sure Criterion had some reason why they chose it. They can't have just plucked the number out of thin air.

That response doesn't sit well with him, as you can see in this response he posted in the comments:


The problem is, there is absolutely no proof that 1.33:1 is the original aspect ratio. It's a bit strange for someone to get on such a high horse when their position may not even be factually accurate. And even if it is, there's no need to be such a dick about it.

He also thinks the proper aspect ratio for Psycho is 1.66:1 for some reason... even though Hitch always shot US ratios (not European), in addition to the fact that original film cans actually stated 1.85:1. But you can't argue with him.. his writing is enjoyable, but he is not.

[thelittleprince]

Originally Posted by Sukuri

on the subject of best/worst cover.

best: three colour trilogy (specifically blue)
worst: the great dictator

Wow! Now that you mention it, the Blue cover really stands out for me. That was the oddest scene in the movie yet lingered in my mind. Whoever from Criterion decided to choose that shot for the Blu cover is brilliant!

I disagree with your choice of worst cover, however, as I thought The Great Dictator's cover was clever.

[Hendershot737]

...I guess I'm one of the few that didn't think the Solaris cover was all that great.

My faves: Probably The Killing and SSoS

Though I do find it humorous that we are discussing the covers of the Criterion collection. Oh! The lives we live!

I say we discuss the booklets next. Though, in my opinion, size does matter in this regard. So my tops would be around the likes of SSoS, Fanny and Alexander, etc. I love reading the essays and other tidbits. These films are definitely onions with their own multiple layers (well...most of them...I have yet to see Tiny Furniture )