The Criterion Collection

[Yami]

The Internet and, by extension, Google can be very powerful educational tools in any field. Particularly film as you can't only read about the history of the film and those involved but often get a link to where to buy/download it.

[nametag]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Well aren't you just a ball of sunshine?

I am not a film scholar, but I do hold a MLIS. I also grew up watching classic film, as my parents liked to share with my brother and I, the films they grew up watching. I've branched out considerably from what my parents like, although many of those classics they enjoy are still high on my list. I also like to read a lot (hence the MLIS), and I have a BA in history as well. I tend to look a films far differently than film scholars do.

+1
I've been really into films and finding out/watching 'classics' since I was 14 or so and don't think that would've made me less of a valid person to comment on things if I was still that age. My degree was in English but I did take a lot of film related classes within that both in the UK and the US, and I have to say that plenty of those 'scholars' who taught me (in both countries) spoke absolute inarticulate rubbish, and this was at 2 good universities. Having a qualification or being older doesn't mean I have to take their opinion more seriously if I disagree with it.

[rock, stone]

Originally Posted by HyperRealist

So most of these people that I thought were film scholars are just kids with google.....

I can only think of a couple reasons why anyone would feel threatened by this comment.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by rock, stone

I can only think of a couple reasons why anyone would feel threatened by this comment.

I'm rereading my comment and it sounds like I was threatened, but I wasn't. I was just stating my film background. I use Google and Wikipedia as starting points for research.

I admit some of my tastes seem to be quite poor, but I'm happy with them even if they are too mainstream, modern, and tend to threaten the "old guard" of the Criterion collection.

[Old Geezer]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

I'm rereading my comment and it sounds like I was threatened, but I wasn't. I was just stating my film background. I use Google and Wikipedia as starting points for research.

I admit some of my tastes seem to be quite poor, but I'm happy with them even if they are too mainstream, modern, and tend to threaten the "old guard" of the Criterion collection.

Never feel the need to apologize for the movies you enjoy watching. I own many "classics" but if you browse my collection you will see an incredible array of trash and odd-ball selections. I can only think of a very small handful that I really didn't enjoy watching. "One man's trash is another man's treasure". I really don't care if someone else approves of my taste - I'm the one watching the movie, not them.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Old Geezer

Never feel the need to apologize for the movies you enjoy watching. I own many "classics" but if you browse my collection you will see an incredible array of trash and odd-ball selections. I can only think of a very small handful that I really didn't enjoy watching. "One man's trash is another man's treasure". I really don't care if someone else approves of my taste - I'm the one watching the movie, not them.

I was being jovial. I recently read Gone With the Wind (the film really cut a lot out! It's good but it's lost a lot of its glamour after reading the novel) and that's where the "old guard" comment comes from. It's interesting to see and compare to the novel, the people who want what they consider to be traditional Criterion titles, as in classic art house and foreign films, aka the old guard, to the scallywags and carpetbaggers, aka "the Facebook fans" and those of us who enjoy both kinds of films, or only the super popular stuff.

I do value the opinions of a lot of people in this thread as I have discovered some fantastic films I might have simply overlooked because I didn't think they'd mesh with my tastes. I like what I like and if everyone liked the same thing, it would be boring. I do know several posters who have stopped posting in this thread due to the attitudes of others, ad they feel intimidated and unwelcomed due to their tastes in film though.

[Banned User]

You don't need to be a film scholar to appreciate films of all types. IMO many film scholars try and read too much into films. That always irritates me. I can't count how many times I've heard a 'expert' explain motivations for key scenes filled with deep meanings and historical allegories only to later hear the Director comment later and say all of that insight was baloney and the scene had a different meaning all together.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Banned User

You don't need to be a film scholar to appreciate films of all types. IMO many film scholars try and read too much into films. That always irritates me. I can't count how many times I've heard a 'expert' explain motivations for key scenes filled with deep meanings and historical allegories only to later hear the Director comment later and say all of that insight was baloney and the scene had a different meaning all together.

Film scholars are similar to literary critics that way, always finding meaning in nothing, and when they're told there's nothing, they tell the authors they don't know their own work.

See Back to School for a great example of this.

[Akijama]

Originally Posted by Benchman

Would anyone else love to see a criterion release of Spike Lee's The 25th Hour?

Oh,yeah....absolutely!One of my most desired "yet to be released on Blu" titles


Btw,it seems that Criterion finally start to "listen" their fans,so within the August - October time frame we will be getting The Royal Tenenbaums,The Game,In the Mood for Love...titles fans have longed the years for.
If the trend "give 'em what they want!" continues,we might be getting Brazil,Le Samurai and The Vanishing upgrades shortly.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by jcs913

By the way, since we have your attention...
I never heard your thoughts on the UK Bergman box set???

And you never will. *insert maniacal laugh*

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by DarkRyder

1-900-MIXALOT

I keep getting a dial tone. Anyone else had any luck reaching this lad at this number?

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by joie

Beneath a black sky filled with red clouds, outsized Criterion cases seemed to glow from a light within; when, suddenly, the landscape lit by lightning, a cemetary full of electric tombstones was revealed, and, there! there! on a grassy knoll, Criterion staff were interring Rosemary's Baby.

That must have taken hours to get right...
Another example of Kidz w/Google....

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

I keep getting a dial tone. Anyone else had any luck reaching this lad at this number?

He is prob on Broadway with his posse. Try again later.

[stobbart]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Film scholars are similar to literary critics that way, always finding meaning in nothing, and when they're told there's nothing, they tell the authors they don't know their own work.

I agree 100% with this. I am a filmmaker/student and tend to hold pretty radical ideas about film in general. Which is probably why I agree that intent and "meaning" in films are pretty much useless.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by stobbart

I agree 100% with this. I am a filmmaker/student and tend to hold pretty radical ideas about film in general. Which is probably why I agree that intent and "meaning" in films are pretty much useless.

Exactly. I'm sure authors and film makers have their own intent, but if you got something out of it they didn't, that's not always a bad thing. However to harp on it and claim what you interpret is thr one and oly meaning and everyone else is wrong is complete folly. It makes me take film critics with a grain of salt, but for Internet message board posturing, it's totally fine.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by jcs913

That must have taken hours to get right...
Another example of Kidz w/Google....

Ironic considering joie is the one who came up with the kidz nickname and is constantly decrying the films with the collection.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

And you never will. *insert maniacal laugh*

Maniacal laugh, maniacal laugh.

Sorry, you reminded me of the new Muppets film.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Ironic considering joie is the one who came up with the kidz nickname and is constantly decrying the films with the collection.

I know, that's why I used it..
I thought it fit.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Ironic considering joie is the one who came up with the kidz nickname and is constantly decrying the films with the collection.

Kidz Bop???

[BluPix]

Originally Posted by Old Geezer

Never feel the need to apologize for the movies you enjoy watching. I own many "classics" but if you browse my collection you will see an incredible array of trash and odd-ball selections. I can only think of a very small handful that I really didn't enjoy watching. "One man's trash is another man's treasure". I really don't care if someone else approves of my taste - I'm the one watching the movie, not them.

This should be one of the primary rules of film discussion.

Watching film—and, for that matter, making them—is a very subjective endeavor and no two people can necessarily be expected to experience the same movie in the exact way or have the same feelings about it. One need not be concerned about what others think about their tastes in film or about what those others see as reflective as one's personality or lifestyle.

...Just as one need not be concerned about what others think of their lifestyle.