The Criterion Collection

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by iScottie

The Criterion Collection was the way for me to break my cycle of mainstream films and explore a wide variety of styles and works from numerous countries. While I realized a little late into the game that buying all of the films, "just cause", was incredibly stupid, it allowed me to see what I now consider to be some of the best films of all-time.

Still, I would not buy every film from Sony, Universal, Warner Bros., and Paramount, for example, so why would I buy every one from Criterion?

I understand. I was just commenting on a series of posts.

[Gusto-Guus]

My CC orders of Eraserhead and High and Low came in today! Ah, yeah!

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by alien2010

Spot on. I too like to add a Criterion title to my blu ray shelf. I rarely blind buy, the only titles I blind bought were; The Man Who Knew Too Much, Purple Noon and The Spy Who Came From In The Cold. I really like the first two films, but the third has become one of my favorite films of all time, and has replaced The IPCRESS File as my favorite spy film. I knew Spy was a title that I was not going to let go easily since I adore the spy genre. I also bought Eyes Without a Face and I sold that on since it was a film I knew I wouldn't watch again.

Pray tell me how were the Laserdisc days? How was the novelty and quality of watching films like Citizen Kane, Taxi Driver and Blade Runner?

I bought my first Laserdisc player at Montgomery Ward in 1989 for a $300.00 sale price.

Criterion Laserdiscs were the only way to could get films Widescreen. It was not until later on that studios would release non pan-scan films on LD. 2001 was a great example of wanting a film widescreen and embracing Criterion. They were also very expensive. Back then I wish some of them were priced like they are priced now, and what people complain as being too expensive now.

There were more studio films available to Criterion during the LD period. It was not until DVD hit big that studios wanted to release catalog titles themselves. People complain about Tootsie and The Big Chill like they are tarnishing the Criterion image, but both of those were Criterion laserdiscs. They also released Ghostbusters and Close Encounters amongst others.

You made some great and safe choices with those blind buys. I am a big Martin Ritt fan and I love espionage, so The Spy Who Came in from the Cold was a no-brainer for me. It is the first time I ever owned it on disc, but do remember watching it on TCM years ago.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by alien2010

As much as I love Kieslowski, Blind Chance, Dekalog, The Scar and obviously The Three Colours Trilogy, I just can't stand Veronique. It's got a great idea, but I find it way too slow. But for me its Irene Jacob that ruins it for me, she is just too damn sweet. Maybe that's the reason why I consider Red the weakest of the trilogy. I LOVE Blue and White, but Jacob really annoys me at times.

See, I'm the exact opposite. While I adore Blue, and I think White is very good, it's Red that has always completely blown me away. And it's because of Jacob's performance. That same holds for Veronique.

She has this amazing charisma and stunning expressiveness.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by alien2010

As much as I love Kieslowski, Blind Chance, Dekalog, The Scar and obviously The Three Colours Trilogy, I just can't stand Veronique. It's got a great idea, but I find it way too slow. But for me its Irene Jacob that ruins it for me, she is just too damn sweet. Maybe that's the reason why I consider Red the weakest of the trilogy. I LOVE Blue and White, but Jacob really annoys me at times.

Thats a shame, Veronique flew by for me I was so engrossed in this mystery - but we all like different things ^^

I found it better than Three Colours tbh

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by SlickDamian

Halloween coming up, recently purchased and watched blus of The Exorcist and Misery, two essential horror/thriller films. What horror or thriller films in the collection do you all consider essential? The Vanishing is one that I am buying.

I wouldn't consider either of those "essential". I didn't like, and don't own, The Exorcist. And while I liked Misery well enough, I don't feel compelled to rewatch.

I'm busy with other things lately, so I'm not sure that I will have time to watch any horror films this month. If I do, I'll start off with my as-yet-unwatched Universal Classic Monsters: The Essential Collection Blu-ray set and my Kino Blu-ray of Nosferatu. If I have time left over from that, the ones on my list will be:

BDs: Nosferatu (Kino), The Omen (original), and the two del Toros from Criterion: Cronos and The Devil's Backbone

DVDs: The Val Lewton Horror Collection, Curse of the Demon, and Vampyr (Criterion)

[Polaroid]

La double vie de Veronique - YouTube

Love this scene

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Gusto-Guus

My CC orders of Eraserhead and High and Low came in today! Ah, yeah!

[Show spoiler]

I'm envious. I have The Innocents and Pandora's Box arriving tomorrow. But I also have Breathless and Repulsion coming sometime early next week, I think.

So, no new Criterion goodness for me today. Though I just watched Vivre sa vie, so I can hardly complain.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I was browsing through my Film textbook for school just now and I found "The Criterion Collection" in the glossary. The passage states that "adding commentaries and other extras to a film had been pioneered in 1984 by the Criterion Collection in their high-end laserdiscs."

Pretty cool if you ask me.

They were also the first who (almost) consistently presented films in OAR. They weren't the first, even in the US, but almost all of their LDs were released in OAR.

The first US laserdisc to be released in OAR was the MGM/UA release of Woody Allen's Manhattan, but it was still cropped from its original 2.35:1 ratio to 1.85:1. MGM/UA later remastered and reissued it in its OAR.

Off the top of my head, their LDs that were not in OAR include the "two-fer" of Tunes of Glory and The Horse's Mouth (the later individual reissues were in OAR), Vengeance Is Mine, and Carrie.

In the case of Carrie, De Palma requested that they transfer it open matte. Interestingly enough, while Criterion's LD of Alphaville was widescreen, their DVD of it was open matte at Godard's request.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

Probably for the same reason that in Se7en,

[Show spoiler]there were people convinced -- absolutely CONVINCED -- that they saw Gwyneth's decapitated head in the box at the end. Fincher talks hilariously about this on the commentary.

IOW, when something is very well done, you don't always remember seeing what you actually saw.

I've come across people who are surprised when I point out that while Halloween instigated the late-70s and 80s wave of very graphic slasher films, there's virtually no on-screen gore or violence in Carpenter's film. Like Hitchcock, he suggests it all through careful editing. It's too bad Carpenter went in the opposite direction with Halloween II, which was (literally!) a blood-bath.

Alien is another surprise. Even the chest-burster scene was filmed at such oblique angles that you really don't see that much on-screen. Ridley Scott shows you just enough to let your mind fill in the rest.

[alien2010]

Originally Posted by Brad1963

I bought my first Laserdisc player at Montgomery Ward in 1989 for a $300.00 sale price.

Criterion Laserdiscs were the only way to could get films Widescreen. It was not until later on that studios would release non pan-scan films on LD. 2001 was a great example of wanting a film widescreen and embracing Criterion. They were also very expensive. Back then I wish some of them were priced like they are priced now, and what people complain as being too expensive now.

There were more studio films available to Criterion during the LD period. It was not until DVD hit big that studios wanted to release catalog titles themselves. People complain about Tootsie and The Big Chill like they are tarnishing the Criterion image, but both of those were Criterion laserdiscs. They also released Ghostbusters and Close Encounters amongst others.

You made some great and safe choices with those blind buys. I am a big Martin Ritt fan and I love espionage, so The Spy Who Came in from the Cold was a no-brainer for me. It is the first time I ever owned it on disc, but do remember watching it on TCM years ago.

Thanks for your recollections. $300, I can't begin to imagine how expensive players were back in those days. LD players are still pretty expensive, even for an obsolete system. I sadly never indulged in LD, I was only 14 when LD finally ended, but I heard many commentators saying that LD maybe analog, but it is still far better than blu-ray. Please let me know if this is true.

When I'm bored at work, I always go onto the LD Database and I look through these old LD's, and I'm surprised by some of the Criterion catalog. You mentioned Ghostbusters and even though I love this film, its amazing to think this mainstream comedy was a Criterion label, also there was Coppola's Dracula and Halloween. But what really surprised me was Criterion releasing the first three Bond films! I know the franchise had problems back in the 90s due to the constant headache that is MGM, but did they really allow a third party to release some of the most beloved films of one of the most successful, loved and iconic franchises in cinema history?

On another note, are the January releases being announced today, or tomorrow?

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by alien2010

Thanks for your recollections. $300, I can't begin to imagine how expensive players were back in those days. LD players are still pretty expensive, even for an obsolete system. I sadly never indulged in LD, I was only 14 when LD finally ended, but I heard many commentators saying that LD maybe analog, but it is still far better than blu-ray. Please let me know if this is true.

When I'm bored at work, I always go onto the LD Database and I look through these old LD's, and I'm surprised by some of the Criterion catalog. You mentioned Ghostbusters and even though I love this film, its amazing to think this mainstream comedy was a Criterion label, also there was Coppola's Dracula and Halloween. But what really surprised me was Criterion releasing the first three Bond films! I know the franchise had problems back in the 90s due to the constant headache that is MGM, but did they really allow a third party to release some of the most beloved films of one of the most successful, loved and iconic franchises in cinema history?

On another note, are the January releases being announced today, or tomorrow?

Tomorrow hopefully, but someone mentioned theres an american holiday tomorrow?

[alien2010]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Tomorrow hopefully, but someone mentioned theres an american holiday tomorrow?

What, another holiday?! Seriously we in the UK probably have the least amount of holidays on earth!

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by jayembee

I've come across people who are surprised when I point out that while Halloween instigated the late-70s and 80s wave of very graphic slasher films, there's virtually no on-screen gore or violence in Carpenter's film. Like Hitchcock, he suggests it all through careful editing. It's two bad Carpenter went in the opposite direction with Halloween II, which was (literally!) a blood-bath.

Alien is another surprise. Even the chest-burster scene was filmed at such oblique angles that you really don't see that much on-screen. Ridley Scott shows you just enough to let your mind fill in the rest.

Yeah, Halloween is an excellent example.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Tomorrow hopefully, but someone mentioned theres an american holiday tomorrow?

No, it was Monday -- Columbus Day. But it's pretty meaningless. I mean, they still picked up our garbage and recycling for example. Banks are closed, but that's about it as far as I know.

I would be shocked if Criterion delayed until Thursday because of a holiday that hardly anyone even knows exists. Well, I'd be dismayed too.

ETA: Oh, and there was no mail delivery.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I know there are "completists" out there as well as collectors who buy things just to have them and maintain a library, even if they're never watched, but I wouldn't buy everything of anything even if I could afford it and had the room for it.

There's a line in Harlan Ellison's story/teleplay "Paladin of the Lost Hour" (aired as an 80s Twilight Zone episode). Glyn Turman's character is impressed by the number of books that Danny Kaye's character has. Kaye talks about how people would look in amazement, asking "Have you read all those books?" ("As if that's somehow an unbelievable feat," Kaye adds). Kaye responds that after years of getting this question, he finally came up with the proper answer: "Of course not. Why would you want a library full of books you've already read?"

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Some people just like to collect them all - I buy A LOT but I won't buy them all or buy them for the sake of it, there are many films in collection I am avoiding and have no interest in.

Back in the LD days, I wanted to collect all of the Criterion releases. Never managed to (I have maybe half of them). Wanted to collect all of their DVDs, too, but as the market grew by leaps and bounds, there became too many releases from other labels that took precedence.

I would theoretically like to collect all of their BDs, but I can't afford it (as the saying goes, the spirit is willing but the wallet is weak). Especially with so much other good stuff being released. I can't even keep up with the titles I really really want, let alone ones that I would want only for completist's sake.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

Sadly I think, I may be wrong, that many people buy Criterion just because it's Criterion.

When I decided to collect Criterion LDs, it was because they did so many titles that I was familiar with and liked (if not loved), that I figured that I should try some of their releases I was not familiar with. There were so few blind buys that I didn't care for that I felt comfortable in knowing that with any Criterion release I bought, the odds of liking it were considerably in my favor.

There are works by any number of directors, like Powell & Pressburger, Renoir, and Tarkovsky, that have become favorites of mine but never would have enjoyed if I hadn't made the decision to buy Criterion titles just because they were Criterion.

It's that I can't believe that some people are interested in every single release Criterion does, every single month..

I'm not interested in every single Criterion release every single month, but I am certainly interested in most of them.

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by alien2010

Thanks for your recollections. $300, I can't begin to imagine how expensive players were back in those days. LD players are still pretty expensive, even for an obsolete system. I sadly never indulged in LD, I was only 14 when LD finally ended, but I heard many commentators saying that LD maybe analog, but it is still far better than blu-ray. Please let me know if this is true.

When I'm bored at work, I always go onto the LD Database and I look through these old LD's, and I'm surprised by some of the Criterion catalog. You mentioned Ghostbusters and even though I love this film, its amazing to think this mainstream comedy was a Criterion label, also there was Coppola's Dracula and Halloween. But what really surprised me was Criterion releasing the first three Bond films! I know the franchise had problems back in the 90s due to the constant headache that is MGM, but did they really allow a third party to release some of the most beloved films of one of the most successful, loved and iconic franchises in cinema history?

On another note, are the January releases being announced today, or tomorrow?

I think Criterion has had a greater impact and DVD and Blu ray. Film restoration really took off during the 90's and has become more common than it was when Criterion first started. They have had access to a more varied list of titles and the film elements are now in much better condition. Criterion may dip into more mainstream Hollywood titles again since the studios are losing interest.

I'm still guessing tomorrow will be the announcements. I am hoping for either Elevator to the Gallows or Hiroshima, mon amour.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

See, I'm the exact opposite. While I adore Blue, and I think White is very good, it's Red that has always completely blown me away. And it's because of Jacob's performance. That same holds for Veronique.

She has this amazing charisma and stunning expressiveness.

Same here.