The Criterion Collection

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by diskspinner

May be, but liking everything is too safe and doesn't really help the readers.

He probably just wants to encourage the members to check them out by showing the positive sides to certain films.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by diskspinner

What I hate regarding Criterion reviews in blu-ray.com is no movie gets less than 4 (Well, may be there is a few but do not remember seeing any getting less than 4)...Movies are supposed to be subjective (& personal opinion) but Dr. Svet seems to like everything thrown to him by criterion. So before buying I have started borrowing from library.

From what I've seen reviews are here are primarily release reviews and not primarily movie reviews. If reviews are heavily weighted toward PQ, AQ and extras it only stands to reason that a company that consistently releases higher than average quality products will tend to receive higher than average scores. I wouldn't be at all surprised if for example Sony transfers tend to do every bit as well as Criterion on average.

Now, I will say I sometimes think the curve at Blu-ray.com is pretty generous in general. It almost seems like 'better than a DVD' is a guaranteed three and that might be a bit low. That sort of inflation doesn't really matter in and of itself but it does have the effect of 'compressing' the review scale ie all decent to excellent releases all fall in the same relatively narrow range which can make picking out the truly excellent a bit more difficult.

But that's another matter entirely.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

You didn't, but too many rely on wiki pages and fan sites to explain everything. Its a blessing and a curse.

Well, to be honest, that film makes little sense, regardless of how many times you watch it. It's cool, but any film that needs a chart to explain the proceedings is kinda of a fail in my book.

[ElliesDad]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

What would make you say that? I just saw (and really dug) Southland Tales. It really must be the end of the world.

Just had this kind of wrath of Khan imagery come to mind as I read the post...

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by retablo

Well, to be honest, that film makes little sense, regardless of how many times you watch it. It's cool, but any film that needs a chart to explain the proceedings is kinda of a fail in my book.

I'm cool with plot holes (there may be a few in Southland Tales too). If there Weren't any, Shane Carruth would have perfected the flux capacitor.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by ElliesDad

Just had this kind of wrath of Khan imagery come to mind as I read the post...

I won't know that that means until May (hopefully)

[octagon]

Originally Posted by retablo

Well, to be honest, that film makes little sense, regardless of how many times you watch it. It's cool, but any film that needs a chart to explain the proceedings is kinda of a fail in my book.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I'm cool with plot holes (there may be a few in Southland Tales too). If there Weren't any, Shane Carruth would have perfected the flux capacitor.

I wasn't exactly wowed by it but I would definitely give it an A for effort.

For all the pissing and moaning I've done over the years about movies beating me over the head every little plot element I can't really complain when one doesn't spell everything out. Or if it doesn't all add up in the end.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by octagon

I wasn't exactly wowed by it but I would definitely give it an A for effort.

For all the pissing and moaning I've done over the years about movies beating me over the head every little plot element I can't really complain when one doesn't spell everything out. Or if it doesn't all add up in the end.

It could just be all those Mike Snow, Miklos Jancso and Seijun Suzuki movies that beg you to look elsewhere.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by octagon

From what I've seen reviews are here are primarily release reviews and not primarily movie reviews. If reviews are heavily weighted toward PQ, AQ and extras it only stands to reason that a company that consistently releases higher than average quality products will tend to receive higher than average scores. I wouldn't be at all surprised if for example Sony transfers tend to do every bit as well as Criterion on average.

Now, I will say I sometimes think the curve at Blu-ray.com is pretty generous in general. It almost seems like 'better than a DVD' is a guaranteed three and that might be a bit low. That sort of inflation doesn't really matter in and of itself but it does have the effect of 'compressing' the review scale ie all decent to excellent releases all fall in the same relatively narrow range which can make picking out the truly excellent a bit more difficult.

But that's another matter entirely.

With any critics it takes reading several of their reviews of films and discs you've seen to get a feel for what they react to and what to expect from their reactions. I've often found PQ and AQ ratings overly picky on things that didn't bother me in the least, while others seemed to ignore glaring problems that distracted me intensely.

As for critiquing of the movies themselves from a cinematic analysis approach, I've actually found the majority of Blu-ray.com reviews to be the equal if not the better of many if not most regular print magazine and newspaper critics. Each Blu-ray.com critic has certain particular likes and dislikes, yet all seem to display a substantial sense of broad social/historical context, style, thematic perceptiveness, and overall aesthetic taste that is all but completely absent from most on-line reviews. I've even considered printing out some Blu-ray.com reviews to make my own insert booklets.

Those who vigorously collect Criterion titles (and Kino and Olive and Twilight Time), by their nature have a very broad and eclectic taste to begin with, but there will always be titles that some people will love that others hate and vice-versa, while still others think the same titles are so-so and unmemorable in any way. I bought BLACK MOON (the Malle film) largely because of the Blu-ray.com review and because it was a Criterion release, and while far from my favorite film, I'm glad I got to see it and may revisit it periodically. (And I'd still prefer a full-blown Criterion release of the 1934 film called BLACK MOON!) It's also instructive (especially before blind-buying) to read a range of User Reviews to see how many concur, how many violently disagree, and how many wonder what the fuss is all about!

[RiFiFi1955]

Originally Posted by diskspinner

What I hate regarding Criterion reviews in blu-ray.com is no movie gets less than 4 (Well, may be there is a few but do not remember seeing any getting less than 4)...Movies are supposed to be subjective (& personal opinion) but Dr. Svet seems to like everything thrown to him by criterion. So before buying I have started borrowing from library.

I can't stand that! Not commenting on Mr. Svet because I don't know what he has reviewed and shared his opinion on or hasn't but I know some people that will love a film just because it is in the criterion collection...come on no one can love every film in the whole collection(that's ridiculous). I have a friend like this...I always talked about Following for years and he always disagreed with me on the merit of the film...well what do you know he likes it all of a suddden, wonder why?

Sorry for the rant!

[octagon]

I tend to find the movie reviews pretty useful too. For the most part, the typical 'rent it/buy it/buy it right now' breakdowns tend to be a pretty decent guage.

On a purely stylistic basis the reviews can be a bit bland. A movie has to really suck to generate comments more scathing than 'well, I gues it's not terrible if you like that sort of thing' and that's fine. I like a really savage review as much as the next guy but there's nothing wrong with a site culture that tends more toward the high road.

And it's not like savage reviews are hard to find.

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by IronWaffle

CoopFilm,

I just checked and at least on White/Blanc "Second Printing" is printed along the outside rim of the disc art. Specifically, near the end after the Cat. no. And before the film length. I'm assuming Criterion is meticulously consistent with this so if you don't see it there then its time to write Mulvaney. Just don't mention you have heard about his time machine; trust me.

Thanks..I've looked it over a bunch of times and I guess I really got the incorrect version from Criterion directly. I'll have to contact them.

Originally Posted by iScottie

Who in their right mind would make a film like Salo?

I just read about it online and that is straight up DISGUSTING.

..and I think it's one of the best

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Well, they are both divisive, both from 1975, and both have a detached, dry sensibility...above all, I want to hear a Salo first timer's horror story.

My first time was just me mesmerized by it and unable to look away...I felt every emotion imaginable.

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by diskspinner

What I hate regarding Criterion reviews in blu-ray.com is no movie gets less than 4 (Well, may be there is a few but do not remember seeing any getting less than 4)...Movies are supposed to be subjective (& personal opinion) but Dr. Svet seems to like everything thrown to him by criterion.

Let me direct you to the Tiny Furniture review that (rightfully) doesn't come with a recommendation

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

..and I think it's one of the best

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

Let me direct you to the Tiny Furniture review that (rightfully) doesn't come with a recommendation

I don't even think Tiny Furniture is as bad as this stupid film we saw in my Sex and Gender class today entitled "Transamerica". I was tempted to walk out and just go home.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I don't even think Tiny Furniture is as bad as this stupid film we saw in my Sex and Gender class today entitled "Transamerica". I was tempted to walk out and just go home.

It's better than watching The Visitor for Ethics.

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

It's better than watching The Visitor for Ethics.

No love for The Visitor? I want to say I like it, but not having seen it in four years (in which my film tastes have grown oh so much), I don't know what my reaction would be seeing it today.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

It's better than watching The Visitor for Ethics.

I don't think I've watched one film in any of my classes thus far besides some YouTube clips or documentary type films.

Also, speaking of Richard Jenkins, he went into my friend's work a few months back. I never meet anyone famous

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I don't think I've watched one film in any of my classes thus far besides some YouTube clips or documentary type films.

I watch a couple in classes each week

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

I watch a couple in classes each week

But you also take film classes

The film classes at my college are like "learn how to direct". I don't want to know how to direct. If I do anything with movies, I want it to be analysis, etc.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

No love for The Visitor? I want to say I like it, but not having seen it in four years (in which my film tastes have grown oh so much), I don't know what my reaction would be seeing it today.

I might have liked it more four years ago. Dude, it's no different than last year's Magical-Negro movie, Intouchables.