The Criterion Collection

[gpn]

Has there been any word on whether Criterion plans to release Black Narcissus on blu-ray or not? I know there's been a UK release, but I'd rather have all the Criterion bells and whistles.

Greg

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by gpn

Has there been any word on whether Criterion plans to release Black Narcissus on blu-ray or not? I know there's been a UK release, but I'd rather have all the Criterion bells and whistles.

Greg

Well, we know The Red Shoes will be appearing soon, and they may want to stagger their P&P a bit.

[kndy]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

Ironically, the TV version of Fanny and Alexander is only available in the Fanny and Alexander Box Set.

And the TV series is definitely worth it!!!

[PowellPressburger]

My Criterion Collection. I do alphabetical order for my titles, except for the BOX sets that feature more than one film, I shelf together in no real order. I keep my BDs sep from DVDs. And I only own a few of the eclipse series I just have before the BDs.

[Idioteque...]

Originally Posted by kndy

And the TV series is definitely worth it!!!

Yeah but the length is crazy. I usually like to finish the movies in the same day but what Bergman's intention? Was it an intended tv series or was it an intended movie?

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

I usually like to finish the movies in the same day

You should wait until Rivette's "Out 1" is released if Criterion has what it takes to release it. It's almost 13 hours long (I think 12 hours and 53 mins or 773 mins.).

[Idioteque...]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

You should wait until Rivette's "Out 1" is released if Criterion has what it takes to release it. It's almost 13 hours long (I think 12 hours and 53 mins or 773 mins.).

That's insane. How was it released when it was made? Did they show 2 hours per day or something?

I was just thinking the other day, does longer usually mean better? If it patches up plot inconsistencies and I welcome them. Now if there is just extended information that gives you a super indepth version of the character's lives, is it even really needed?

I tend to hear arguments over Apocalypse Now Redux from people who prefer the original theatrical cut.

What's your opinion?

[ChadFL]

Can someone briefly explain to me what "By Brakhage: An Anthology" is? I was unfamiliar with Stan Brakhage until hearing of this release. From what I'm reading on the Criterion website it sounds like thsi is a collection of countless short films of several minutes or so each. What exactly do his works encompass?

[buffetfroid]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

You should wait until Rivette's "Out 1" is released if Criterion has what it takes to release it. It's almost 13 hours long (I think 12 hours and 53 mins or 773 mins.).

god I hope they release that.

[kndy]

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

My Criterion Collection. I do alphabetical order for my titles, except for the BOX sets that feature more than one film, I shelf together in no real order. I keep my BDs sep from DVDs. And I only own a few of the eclipse series I just have before the BDs.

Cool!!! How many are you at right now in your collection? You have many titles I still have yet to get!

[ChadFL]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

That's insane. How was it released when it was made? Did they show 2 hours per day or something?

I was just thinking the other day, does longer usually mean better? If it patches up plot inconsistencies and I welcome them. Now if there is just extended information that gives you a super indepth version of the character's lives, is it even really needed?

I tend to hear arguments over Apocalypse Now Redux from people who prefer the original theatrical cut.

What's your opinion?

Wow, looked it up and it really is a 773 minute film. Officially it's the third longest run-time of any film in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_running_time

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by borninusa

I have read the reviews..and done a bit of research on the title....but my question is..is Pierrot le fou worth getting? I have never seen a movie from this director at all (and I read somewhere that if you havent, this probably isnt the best place to start). I am all about a good Criterion....but just wasnt sure about this one. Thoughts?

i'd rent it quick first. that's what i did. not for me, didn't care for it. i love "odd" films, but this one was just not for me. i read about it a great deal, and see why godard did what he did with particular scenes

[Show spoiler] like with the dead dude on the bed...this obviously draws a sudden emotional reaction from the audience, or the laurel and hardy attack at the gas station mimicking hollywood...i get what he's trying to do here. very little is about "plot". just seems rather dumb, to be perfectly frank. of course, fans of godard will claim its "genius." i just dont see it. maybe i need some glasses.

, its just not my cup of tea.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

That's insane. How was it released when it was made? Did they show 2 hours per day or something?

What's your opinion?

I never seen it (can only be found as bootlegs and theater runs) but I know that it acts I guess like a series where there are alot of characters who have their own story. It says that is was divided into eight episodes around 90-100 minutes each. I guess that meant in theaters. People on Criterion's facebook was pushing for them to release this, and I think they said they will try.

You can read more about it here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_1

You can also watch it on YOUTUBE. Here, I found the 1st part:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCL1VATi--w

[Joe Molotov]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

I tend to hear arguments over Apocalypse Now Redux from people who prefer the original theatrical cut.

What's your opinion?

Apocalypse Now is the perfect example of "more" not always being "better".

I didn't really get into movies until I was in college, so the first time I saw Apocalypse Now was the Redux during it's release in 2001. I didn't like it at all, I thought it was overlong and boring, I almost gave up on it during the french plantation scene. When I finally saw the original theatrical release about a year or so later, I love it. It's one of Top 5 films now.

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

Yeah but the length is crazy. I usually like to finish the movies in the same day but what Bergman's intention? Was it an intended tv series or was it an intended movie?

I watched the DVD in one sitting, and it instantly became the most treasured film I have ever seen. Then I saw it screened at IFC Center in NYC with a 15 minute intermission. It flew by. Believe me, you want it to last even longer than it does.

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by ChadFL

Wow, looked it up and it really is a 773 minute film. Officially it's the third longest run-time of any film in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_running_time

See, it's films like this that make torrents so tempting (and no, I'm not going to go download it), but really, I hate when films go completely unreleased in home video. Some of us weren't able to make it to Vancouver in 2006 or New York in 2007.

[GGX]

Wow just wow. I ordered Pierrot Le Fou on Blu-ray through the Criterion store February 12th. I received my order yesterday, open it up, no Blu-ray to be found. Only a brightly colored orange t-shirt. :/

I e-mailed Criterion at Orders@Criterion.com and still haven't heard any word back. Who do I have to contact to get my order sorted out!? It's their mistake after all.

[jacobsever]

If you don't want that House shirt, I'll take it!

[kndy]

Originally Posted by borninusa

I have read the reviews..and done a bit of research on the title....but my question is..is Pierrot le fou worth getting?

Yes, it's worth getting but no, you should not start watching Godard films with that movie. As a matter of fact, I think even Ebert has a message of how received disgruntled letters from people when he recommended this film.

To enjoy Godard films, it's good to watch a few first.... give "Breathless", "A Band of Outsiders", "A Woman is a Woman", "Masculin Feminin", "Alphaville" and even "Contempt" a try. Well...at least "Breathless" and then "A Woman is a Woman" and then "Pierrot le fou".

If you only watch this film and not have seen any other Godard films, then you're not going to enjoy it as much.

[Zen_Amako]

Pierrot le fou was the first Godard film I watched, and I enjoyed it enough to seek out some of his others. The first time I watched it, I had no idea where it was going, and I liked that. However, I'm a fan of a lot of experimental films, so the lack of a typical narrative didn't bother me. With Pierrot, Godard (a former film critic) did a lot of playing around with movie conventions. In A Woman is a Woman, ostensibly a musical, he suddenly drops the music from the soundtrack when someone starts singing. Pierrot includes a lot of little experiments like that. Some will be fascinated and some will no doubt be irritated. It's certainly not his most accessible film - from what I've seen, that would be Breathless, Contempt or Band of Outsiders. I guess it comes down to how conventional you like your movies to be. Personally, I didn't much care for Breathless - had I started there, I might not have bothered with Pierrot. Breathless seems a lot more dated now than Pierrot.