The Criterion Collection

[Carletty]

Originally Posted by Tin Drum

They are 49 msrp.

But at least The Leopard shows up in the sale section.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Clare2904

Is there a consensus on which online review site is best - iMDB or RT?

I have never really used RT, something about the site just screams amateur

yes, bsweetness is right. I put more value into what the consensus is on RT. I find IMDB better for exploring a director's filmography and sometimes it is helpful to know what popular opinion is - even if it is a director who may have never made anything close to a mainstream film. It isn't necessarily a direct correlation, but sometimes the popular opinion can indicate "accessibility." (sometimes)

[Clare2904]

Originally Posted by bsweetness

In actuality, you really have that backwards as far as the ratings go.

The ratings on IMDB are just ratings from site users - normal, everyday folks. Amateur movie watchers. Rotten Tomatoes' main ratings come from combining critic's reviews. They also have user ratings, but those aren't the main ones used to rate films.

So, it depends on where you put more stock - the average of what professional critics have to say or votes by average joes. Personally, I've always found the main ratings on Rotten Tomatoes to be far more indicative of how good a movie is or isn't than IMDB. Metacritic is also a pretty good ratings site that performs a similar function as Rotten Tomatoes, but it uses different (and some would say more accurate) ways of coming up with the average scores.

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

yes, bsweetness is right. I put more value into what the consensus is on RT. I find IMDB better for exploring a director's filmography and sometimes it is helpful to know what popular opinion is - even if it is a director who may have never made anything close to a mainstream film. It isn't necessarily a direct correlation, but sometimes the popular opinion can indicate "accessibility." (sometimes)

I am a little wary of "critics". I always have it at the back of mind that they will say whatever they are paid to say.

[StLouisRibs]

Originally Posted by Clare2904

Is there a consensus on which online review site is best - iMDB or RT?

I have never really used RT, something about the site just screams amateur

Rotten Tomatoes is good for what it is - it's a measure of how many critics liked it compared to those who didn't like it. Letter grades or percentages don't matter - just a flat "Did you like it?" metric. As such, it shows that, say, in the case of The Royal Tenenbaums, 80 out of 100 critics liked it. So films like Three Colors: Blue quite rightly end up with very high 90's for being really good films any critic appreciates, but films like Looper also end up with high scores because, though they're nothing exceptional, they do more right than they do wrong and recieve generally positive reviews.

[StonesEGF]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I'm actually going way out on a limb with the blind buy of Nashville, because I've never been particularly jazzed up about Robert Altman films for some reason. I've seen so much universal acclaim for this particular film, though, that curiosity got the best of me.

I saw Nashville and a handful of other Altman movies about 5 years ago. I wasn't particularly taken with any of them except for Short Cuts, which I loved. I'm a Raymond Carver fan, and although the film doesn't exactly have the same feel as the short stories, I still enjoy the heck out of it. It's long at over 3 hours, but the time flies. I highly recommend it!

(I'll have to give Nashville another try in the future.)

[Clare2904]

That said, if people here put stock into then I'll take another look.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Clare2904

I am a little wary of "critics". I always have it at the back of mind that they will say whatever they are paid to say.

hmm... well, maybe that IS true to a certain extent. you'd be safe, however, to see what the critical vantage point is on older films. those films aren't in the theaters right now and aren't going through a big marketing campaign to fill theater seats.

[bsweetness]

Originally Posted by Clare2904

I am a little wary of "critics". I always have it at the back of mind that they will say whatever they are paid to say.

Most critics aren't paid to say one thing or another. Some are suspect, but most are paid to give their professional opinion whether anyone agrees with it or not. And for a lot of foreign, independent, or older films, you'll be hard pressed to find much of an opinion from the general public.

Originally Posted by Clare2904

That said, if people here put stock into then I'll take another look.

Given the thread we're in, it might be good to pay a little more attention to what critics say versus the general public. Criterion releases films that are (for the most part) considered to be important to the art of film, and professional critics are far more likely to give more accurate assessments of those types of films than the general public is. The average person out on the street probably hasn't even heard of the majority of films that Criterion has released, and if they were to watch several of them, they'd probably hate them. I mean, we're talking about the people that the Transformer movies are made for.

[EPlay]

Originally Posted by StonesEGF

I saw Nashville and a handful of other Altman movies about 5 years ago. I wasn't particularly taken with any of them except for Short Cuts, which I loved.

I've seen 9 of Altman's films, and Short Cuts is also the only one I've loved. I am pondering giving Nashville another shot, though -- I think I've come a long way in film experience and taste since I saw it long ago.

[ThePhantom]

Just a heads up for those who haven't noticed:

The Rules of the Game Criterion Blu-ray is only $15.49 at Amazon right now.

Snatched myself a copy right away.

[suprrman51]

Originally Posted by ThePhantom

Just a heads up for those who haven't noticed:

The Rules of the Game Criterion Blu-ray is only $15.49 at Amazon right now.

Snatched myself a copy right away.

Just put my order in. It came out to just under 6 dollars because Amazon had given me a 10 dollar credit towards my next purchase. Pretty awesome deal.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by zoodermin

Not Criterion but Paramount is releasing Billy Wilder's classic Sabrina on BD on April 8!!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...pf_rd_i=468294

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by EPlay

I've seen 9 of Altman's films, and Short Cuts is also the only one I've loved. I am pondering giving Nashville another shot, though -- I think I've come a long way in film experience and taste since I saw it long ago.

McCabe and Miller did nothing for me when I saw it several years ago. Much of the dialog was mumbled. I enjoyed The Player more but not enough to buy it on video.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by EPlay

I've seen 9 of Altman's films, and Short Cuts is also the only one I've loved. I am pondering giving Nashville another shot, though -- I think I've come a long way in film experience and taste since I saw it long ago.

I've only seen 3 Women, Nashville, and Gosford Park and I still think 3 Women is my favorite, though Nashville is a close second.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Clare2904

I am a little wary of "critics". I always have it at the back of mind that they will say whatever they are paid to say.

You're exactly right. They will say whatever they are paid to say.

However, generally speaking, what they are paid to say is what they think of the film (or whatever) at hand. I have doubts that any respectable critic will simply parrot what their boss tells them.

The thing to remember, though, is that critics are people, just like the rest of us. And just like the rest of us, they have their individual points of view, not to mention their own agendas. The difference (hopefully) is that a critic brings a greater knowledge of cinema to their review.

On the flip side, the users at IMDb are also bringing their own idiosyncracies, viewpoints, and agendas. My problem with user reviews at IMDb is that if a reviewer gives a bad review for a movie, I can't tell if they really don't like the movie, or they're just being contrary.

Critics, at least, are generally better than random people at explaining why they have a certain opinion about something.

The trick to paying attention to critics is to make note of the ones you tend to agree with, or even the ones you tend not to agree with. Makes it easier to gauge whether or not you're going to like something you haven't seen yet, based on what they have to say about it.

[Clare2904]

Originally Posted by jayembee

You're exactly right. They will say whatever they are paid to say.

However, generally speaking, what they are paid to say is what they think of the film (or whatever) at hand. I have doubts that any respectable critic will simply parrot what their boss tells them.

The thing to remember, though, is that critics are people, just like the rest of us. And just like the rest of us, they have their individual points of view, not to mention their own agendas. The difference (hopefully) is that a critic brings a greater knowledge of cinema to their review.

On the flip side, the users at IMDb are also bringing their own idiosyncracies, viewpoints, and agendas. My problem with user reviews at IMDb is that if a reviewer gives a bad review for a movie, I can't tell if they really don't like the movie, or they're just being contrary.

Critics, at least, are generally better than random people at explaining why they have a certain opinion about something.

The trick to paying attention to critics is to make note of the ones you tend to agree with, or even the ones you tend not to agree with. Makes it easier to gauge whether or not you're going to like something you haven't seen yet, based on what they have to say about it.

Maybe my question should be who do you use, not which site.

[silentblu]

Originally Posted by ThePhantom

Just a heads up for those who haven't noticed:

The Rules of the Game Criterion Blu-ray is only $15.49 at Amazon right now.

Snatched myself a copy right away.

Got it. One of the ones I had put off during the B&N sale.

[K1NG J0RDAN]

Originally Posted by ThePhantom

Just a heads up for those who haven't noticed:

The Rules of the Game Criterion Blu-ray is only $15.49 at Amazon right now.

Snatched myself a copy right away.

I have a $5 amazon credit but can't decide whether to use it on this or something else.

[CHEЯNOБLY!]

I went through two Nashville's today...the case that holds the DVD edition was broken on both copies. B&N is ordering more copies for me, as they only had the two in store. I was wondering if anyone else is having a problem? Defect?

[smoss469]

Seems there are an abnormally high # of complaints regarding disc security in the new releases, regardless if it's a plastic case or digibook.