The Criterion Collection

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Today, in the good old 21st century, we have a phenomenon known as "surfer's voice." Imagine yourself sitting at home alone one night and deciding to alleviate your solitude by connecting with a friend or family member. A text message or a Facebook post will not suffice, because these luxuries, while convenient, are no substitute for a human voice or the sight of a friendly face. You scroll through your phone contacts and realize that you have not talked with a particular person for a long while. This other person answers the phone and is seemingly grateful to hear from you, but there is something lacking in the person's enthusiasm during the conversation. This person appears to be typing on a keyboard as he or she talks, and is responding to you with short answers as he or she surfs the web or multitasks at the same time while apparently pretending to listen to you. After interacting with this "surfer's voice" for a short while, you politely end the conversation, and stare at the wall in the silence of your home. Not only are you more alone than ever, but you also feel as though you have intruded on a loved one's life.

You've hit such a chord there,

[Ausjdm]

Originally Posted by jw007

I just got back from seeing 12 Years a Slave! What an amazingly realistic and powerful film this was. Wow. The world needs more movies like this. I can think of a few such as Amistad, The Color Purple and Roots (TV series), but this is one of the finest films of its kind. No doubt about it. Steve McQueen is one of the most talented new directors around. Yes, this guy is going to be nominated for plenty of awards. I think this film will get at least half a dozen Oscar nominations.

Great mini review JW! I can't wait to see that movie soon. Saw Shame afew months ago and it was great. This makes me wanna go buy Hunger and see it finally to get in a McQ zone first.

[LegacyCosts]

Originally Posted by billyearle

That's the one. Got it from my mom's cigarette coupons, just cause it had my name on it. But people in NYC kept thinking I'm a big team fan, not that there's anything wrong with that. (Wait a minute, does his say "Buffalo", mine said "Bills") Hope to pick up the Japanese bluray soon, been long enough since the theatrical release, but I remember some good visuals. Hell with it, I'll order it now.

Yeah I almost ordered that but then the US version popped up so I bought it for much cheaper. It is probably my favorite movie of the 90s.

[LegacyCosts]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

My guess is I'm the only person in this thread who holds the following opinion but here goes:

No matter how many Kurosawa films I watch, none of them inspire me to want to see them again. I just can't jump on the popular bandwagon of him being "one of the greatest filmmakers of all time", although I certainly think he's a good one. Criterion has released a lot of his filmography but the more I see, the more I realize that this guy isn't for me.

I agree on some of his films. Ikiru was a chore at times. What about seven samurai though? It is long but it holds up incredibly well and Mifune is captivating as always.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

Yeah, a lot of these "Master Filmmakers" have plenty of movies that are okay to watch once, but I fail to see the replay value... unless you're hosting a Film Studies course.

Luckily, art isn't measured by "replay value"... that's pop culture you're thinkling of.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

something about Fanny and Alexander is calling me. I've seen people say that it is somewhat of a holiday film. I like It's a Wonderful Life, but I just can't share the joy that my family has for the remainder of the holiday's usual suspects. I'd like to buy films that will endure the test of time and I'm hoping to accumulate some that I'll be able to watch with my son when he gets old enough. He is 2 months old. I'd rather him grow up on some of the silent comedies and I certainly don't want him to be averse to the idea of reading subtitles.

Yes, I'd start with FANNY AND ALEXANDER from your list, with MODERN TIMES (though I prefer CITY LIGHTS) and M as close alternates. I always thought M was worthwhile, but never fully appreciated it until the crisp clarity of Criterion's Blu-ray made the story so much more involving than it had ever been before on inferior video copies or 16mm film dupes.

[mdonovan]

Originally Posted by retablo

Luckily, art isn't measured by "replay value"... that's pop culture you're thinkling of.

I disagree completely ....

Michelangelo, Renoir, Mozart, Beethoven ....

They all have replay value ....

At some point art is only about replay value.

Can a single piece of art make an everlasting impression from one viewing ? Yes.

But I would argue that the masters mostly have replay value.

It is the dimension of Time in which real art is created and evaluated.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

My guess is I'm the only person in this thread who holds the following opinion but here goes:

No matter how many Kurosawa films I watch, none of them inspire me to want to see them again. I just can't jump on the popular bandwagon of him being "one of the greatest filmmakers of all time", although I certainly think he's a good one. Criterion has released a lot of his filmography but the more I see, the more I realize that this guy isn't for me.

Shame!

My 88-year-old mother just did a presentation on Kurosawa for her women's club last week, and yesterday invited her book club for a screening of RASHOMON in my basement theatre (at their request, as most of them had already seen RASHOMON a year ago when they read the short stories it was based on, but this year they read Kurosawa's autobiography). Those who saw it for the second time remarked how much more they saw and appreciated in it this time.

That said, I watched SEVEN SAMURAI several years ago on Criterion's DVD, but still have not gotten around to re-watching it on the new Blu-ray. On the other hand, it's always fun to revisit YOJIMBO from time to time (and its Italian and American remakes). I'll probably watch KAGEMUSHA again after I get around to watching the Korean film MASQUERADE, and I'm looking forward to THRONE OF BLOOD, which I haven't seen since I was in college. If the RAN Blu-ray were closer to Criterion-quality, I'd probably watch that more often.

I wouldn't consider the majority of Kurosawa's output any less re-watchable than that of any other major director, from Ford or Hawks to Scorsese or Spielberg or Tarantino. They all have plenty of good films and some truly great films, and a few other reasonably decent films.

[Meek12345]

Paris, Texas is on youtube. It isn't in HD, but I wanted to check it out some way instead of blind buying it. I plan to watch Scanners on youtube after I finish Paris, Texas, since most people on here believe that Criterion will eventually release it. The only other films by Cronenberg that I have seen are The Fly, Videodrome, and Dead Ringers. Will this film leave me traumatized as well? I should probably just go ahead and prepare myself to be freaked out.

If I had to name a critically acclaimed master filmmaker that I'm not very fond of, it would be Stanley Kubrick. I haven't seen The Killing, but have seen every film Kubrick made after it. I'm always impressed with the technical aspects of his films, but can never connect with the characters. Paths of Glory and Spartacus are exceptions for me with Barry Lyndon being my least favorite Kubrick. I prefer for the main character to have some redeeming values, and Barry has none by the second half of the film. I can respect that Kubrick could be a favorite director of some members on this forum though. I would never say that he wasn't very talented.

[Debbie Downer]

Originally Posted by Meek12345

Paris, Texas is on youtube. It isn't in HD, but I wanted to check it out some way instead of blind buying it. I plan to watch Scanners on youtube after I finish Paris, Texas, since most people on here believe that Criterion will eventually release it. The only other films by Cronenberg that I have seen are The Fly, Videodrome, and Dead Ringers. Will this film leave me traumatized as well? I should probably just go ahead and prepare myself to be freaked out.

If I had to name a critically acclaimed master filmmaker that I'm not very fond of, it would be Stanley Kubrick. I haven't seen The Killing, but have seen every film Kubrick made after it. I'm always impressed with the technical aspects of his films, but can never connect with the characters. Paths of Glory and Spartacus are exceptions for me with Barry Lyndon being my least favorite Kubrick. I prefer for the main character to have some redeeming values, and Barry has none by the second half of the film. I can respect that Kubrick could be a favorite director of some members on this forum though. I would never say that he wasn't very talented.

I can't wait to watch Gravity on youtube. It should be alright if it's in 480p at least.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Ausjdm

Great mini review JW! I can't wait to see that movie soon. Saw Shame afew months ago and it was great. This makes me wanna go buy Hunger and see it finally to get in a McQ zone first.

See it. Walk, no, RUN, to the movie theater. Yes, run. Sprint. Plow through cars if you must. Jump out of helicopters to get to your theater if the roads are closed. Crawl through the sewage system if nothing else works. Just see it. Hear it. Feel it. Taste it. Smell it. 12 Years a Slave will put you back into the 1840s, when the ills of a country were just growing and growing, when people owned others and laws made it standard, when injustice and bigotry was commonplace in public places, when hate and racism was encouraged for the sake of profits, when housewives of all varieties used the "N" word without shame or remorse, when a lashing on the back was deep enough to hit spinal tissue, when humanity was never more evil than the eyes of its beholders, when hope and faith were lost for the priority of power, authority, greed and war. This time may come again and absolution will never be more relevant than it was in the distant future. Run, run, run.

[scorsetinogilliam]

Originally Posted by jw007

See it. Walk, no, RUN, to the movie theater. Yes, run. Sprint. Plow through cars if you must. Jump out of helicopters to get to your theater if the roads are closed. Crawl through the sewage system if nothing else works. Just see it. Hear it. Feel it. Taste it. Smell it. 12 Years a Slave will put you back into the 1840s, when the ills of a country were just growing and growing, when people owned others and laws made it standard, when injustice and bigotry was commonplace in public places, when hate and racism was encouraged for the sake of profits, when housewives of all varieties used the "N" word without shame or remorse, when a lashing on the back was deep enough to hit spinal tissue, when humanity was never more evil than the eyes of its beholders, when hope and faith were lost for the priority of power, authority, greed and war. This time may come again and absolution will never be more relevant than it was in the distant future. Run, run, run.

(Spoiler!!!!!!!!!!!)
This film was just okay. Roughly five great scenes, surrounded by decent filmmaking. The score was horrendous and the film is only truly effective when we are watching intense suffering. Anything in between is very distant and unaffecting. Also, Brad Pitt's paid for producer role was painful to endure. I normally love him, but his lines might as well have been, "Hi! I'm Brad Pitt. (SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) I'm here to wrap shit up conveniently" Easily McQueen's worst film. Still worth watching, but the praise has been rather excessive.

[hustlermane]

Originally Posted by Blu-Velvet

The picture quality on Criterion's LOLA MONTES is very good. A friend of mine absolutely adores the film and Ophuls in general. I found it visually impressive but dramatically disappointing overall, partly due to casting (especially the title role), partly to pacing. It's certainly worth watching, but whether you'll like it enough to buy and rewatch very often is less predictable.

Oh awesome - I like Ophuls enough and that style of colour widescreen cinematography that I think it's a safe bet, I was more just trying to ascertain whether the PQ would do it justice. Excited to buy it then!


And also, I'm with you on Kurosawa, to the guy who wasn't that keen. Seven Samurai, Rashomon and especially Ikiru didn't do anything for me, and yet I kept plowing through. If it's worth anything, it wasn't until my tenth Kurosawa when I found a hidden delight - I absolutely loved High and Low. The rest I could take or leave.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

My guess is I'm the only person in this thread who holds the following opinion but here goes:

No matter how many Kurosawa films I watch, none of them inspire me to want to see them again. I just can't jump on the popular bandwagon of him being "one of the greatest filmmakers of all time", although I certainly think he's a good one. Criterion has released a lot of his filmography but the more I see, the more I realize that this guy isn't for me.

All of the Kurosawa films have extensive replay value for me. The obvious highlights for me are Yojimbo, Sanjuro, Seven Samurai, my two Eclipse Kurosawa sets, Ikiru, Drunken Angel, The Bad Sleep Well, and Stray Dog.

Stray Dog, in particular, gives American film noir a run for its money. The more I watch it, the closer it edges to being my favorite Kurosawa film.

That said, I have not exactly been in a frantic rush to upgrade my old Kurosawa DVDs to Blu-ray, save for the Yojimbo/Sanjuro set and Seven Samurai.

I saw Kagemusha on a used Blu-ray rack for $15 the other day, but I just picked it up, looked over it, and put it back on the shelf. I'll upgrade this movie one day, but I'm just in a different headspace right now.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jw007

I just got back from seeing 12 Years a Slave! What an amazingly realistic and powerful film this was. Wow. The world needs more movies like this. I can think of a few such as Amistad, The Color Purple and Roots (TV series), but this is one of the finest films of its kind. No doubt about it. Steve McQueen is one of the most talented new directors around. Yes, this guy is going to be nominated for plenty of awards. I think this film will get at least half a dozen Oscar nominations.

12 Years a Slave is the best movie about slavery that I have seen to date. I loved the idyllic scenery of antebellum Louisiana juxtaposed with the harshness of the story.

It's not a perfect film. Brad Pitt is commendable in his small role, but his comparable star power makes him stand out like a cockroach on a wedding cake, and the scenes took my mind out of the story and into the fact that I was watching a movie after all. Other than that small flaw, though, I do not have any complaints, and I was drawn back into the fold quite easily.

However...

My favorite film of 2013, by a long mile, is All Is Lost. I saw it a couple weeks after 12 Years a Slave, and it made me forget all about that film.

[lordmorpheus72]

So I know this is not Criterion related, but thought this might be of interest to a few here. One of today's Amazon Black Friday Week deals is the Ford At Fox Collection. It contains The Frontier Marshall / My Darling Clementine / Drums Along the Mohawk / How Green Was My Valley / The Grapes of Wrath / Becoming John Ford. It starts at 11:24am EST, but is DVD.

Just thought I'd post since I know there are Ford fans in here.

[vertigo12314]

Originally Posted by RiFiFi1955

Quick thought on Paris, Texas here. I want some opinions on this.

[Show spoiler]I think the film is remarkable in almost every way except for one aspect of the film, and that is Travis's evolution throughout the film, the 180 he makes from the beginning to end just seems very far fetched to me. I know all the key elements in that Wenders wanted to show a man lost and finding his way again but when we first meet Travis he is more than just a lost soul. Frankly for the first hour of the film he is far from being in any so-called right state of mind. I just think the switch was flipped too quick for me in how his character evolved. It was almost like overnight he made this magical recovery. I think it is the film's only real flaw but a big one it be. I think we should have met Travis, a down on his luck loner who lost his way instead of the mentally unstable, unpredictable Travis we do first meet in the film or if not that more time should have been spent on him heeling and recovering to get back to a functional member of society(this option would have made the film longer which would have been ok or they could have used editing and tricks with time to convey his progress too). Also not to say Travis was back to his old self by the end of the film because he was obviously still overwhelmed with issues and emotions but compared to the beginning of the film...well it is like a complete 180. I never really hear anyone talking about this, did anyone else get this same impression to any degree?

[Show spoiler]Or the flaw that the guardians of the child would let the child go without a fight. It's a well acted beautiful movie but it's pure emotion and zero reality.

[Thebunk]

Originally Posted by LegacyCosts

Realism within characters is often more a desired trait than immediately likable characters. I think people that disliked Frances ha felt frustrated and isolated by the characters. They're meant to be flawed, real, and lonely. Frances is a liar and selfish and very Grey. That's why the movie worked for me. Viewers need to stop worrying about other films influences or new wave Bleh Bleh Bleh and enjoy the movie on its own merits. Then if they still hate it then at least it's for good reason

My issue is not with the new wve influences (which I respect) but it is for me, the very unrealistic carriers, not liking them or even able to empathize with them. Also, with the

[Show spoiler]first 80 minutes being focused on how self-centered Frances is and then all of a sudden, in the last 5 to 10 minutes she completely changes with really no real catalyst for change. It makes no sense that she all of a sudden moves back to the city and takes up the receptionist job.

[joie]

Does anyone else think "director approved" could be a euphemism for "do-over?"

I think it clearly is with The Tin Drum and Heaven's Gate, primarily because those releases omit the theatrical cut. With Tin Drum, there is clear evidence in the old DVD's extras that the director considered that cut a director's cut. That extra doesn't appear to have been carried over to the recent, new "complete" cut discs. In that extra, the director stated that he made the cuts that were made because they made the film a more faithful adaptation of the novel.

Why couldn't a theatrical cut of Heaven's Gate have been reconstructed from the materials used to produce the new cut? One of the interesting things about Heaven's Gate is why it was such a flop in theaters. Without a theatrical cut, that's impossible to explore.

I suppose a bigger question is, "what does 'director approved' mean?" for each release that's "director approved." It could be anything from the director going with an assistant's judgement of the work to actual involvement with the company during the process of readying the release. Where is it along that continuum, for each "director approved" release?

[RiFiFi1955]

Originally Posted by vertigo12314

[Show spoiler]Or the flaw that the guardians of the child would let the child go without a fight. It's a well acted beautiful movie but it's pure emotion and zero reality.

Yeah, that part just didn't seem logical either. Well I guess I am glad I am not the only one who noticed these things. But Yes it is a beautiful film and that scene with Travis and Jane in the peepshow house is just so amazingly powerful(probably ranking as one of the most powerful scenes I have ever seen captured on film).