The Criterion Collection

[octagon]

Originally Posted by fdm

I think the motivating factor behind all that was that there are too many unflagged spoilers being thrown out and about. The off topic-ness probably wouldn't be such a deal if it weren't for the corresponding risk of having a movie you haven't seen get spoiled in some way. Include me among those who don't want to know much beyond cast and crew and maybe a brief synopsis when I get around to watching a film... the rest is spoilers.

And no, it is not all that easy to read around the spoliers.

This.

I understand that if you don't want to hear the score of a game you've got DVRed you don't stop in a bar on your way home from work. I get that.

And I understand that discussions of particular films won't always be limited to the threads devoted to those films. That's just how forums work. I get that too.

But that said, people do get a little casual discussing relatively new films at some length pretty much anywhere anytime.

[MechaGodzilla]

It was interesting reading your thoughts on the film, The Great Owl, and I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Funny you noticed David Sylvian's credit, and yes, he co-wrote and sang on the vocal version of the theme song; Forbidden Colours. Unfortunately this version of the song doesn't play anywhere in the film, nor did Criterion include the music video among the special features, which is a shame.

Sylvian & Sakamoto - Forbidden Colours - YouTube

It's a lovely song, Sylvian actually happens to be one of my favorite artists as well, I think he's brilliant.

[dwk]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I quickly recognized actor Takeshi Kitano from his wonderfully skewed role in Battle Royale (2000). I did not realize that he was such an expressive actor in his younger years, and his role drives a lot of the film's driving impact.

In 1994, Kitano was in a motorcycle accident and had to have some facial reconstruction surgery.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

The main film that has bugged me ratio wise is Koyaanisqatsi.

I know the director changed his mind and at time widescreen wasn't an option but I have always loved the original ratio, it showed more of the image and just looked more cinematic, the new ratio cuts a lot of the image off and certain scene are ruined.

Similar discussions/arguments are now taking place regarding The Wire, which has been recently become available on On Demand (and, I think, streaming) and will be coming out on Blu-ray in just a few months. The show was originally shot in 4x3 because at the time, HBO wasn't yet sold on 16x9. After a couple of seasons, HBO changed their minds, but creator/showrunner David Simon wanted to keep the look consistent, so it continued as a 4x3 show for its entire run.

But now, for HD, HBO really, really wanted to have it in 16x9. It's clear that the show is being compromised -- a lot of scenes lose an intimacy in the wider frame -- but in reading a blog post by Simon about the effort to look at every single freaking scene and adjust them according to the specific needs and intent of that scene, I feel a bit better about it. It won't be the same as it was originally, but it will be a most-likely-as-compelling variant.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Similar discussions/arguments are now taking place regarding The Wire, which has been recently become available on On Demand (and, I think, streaming) and will be coming out on Blu-ray in just a few months. The show was originally shot in 4x3 because at the time, HBO wasn't yet sold on 16x9. After a couple of seasons, HBO changed their minds, but creator/showrunner David Simon wanted to keep the look consistent, so it continued as a 4x3 show for its entire run.

But now, for HD, HBO really, really wanted to have it in 16x9. It's clear that the show is being compromised -- a lot of scenes lose an intimacy in the wider frame -- but in reading a blog post by Simon about the effort to look at every single freaking scene and adjust them according to the specific needs and intent of that scene, I feel a bit better about it. It won't be the same as it was originally, but it will be a most-likely-as-compelling variant.

Wow that sounds annoying and like a lot of work - its shame they couldn't have left the 4x3 and then have the newer ones 16x9... do they realise they lose image cropping it XD

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Wow that sounds annoying and like a lot of work - its shame they couldn't have left the 4x3 and then have the newer ones 16x9... do they realise they lose image cropping it XD

Only a small amount of shots were cropped on the top and bottom, but only after opening up the sides to fill 16x9; this was done to capture the intimate framing of the 4x3 in important shots. Most of the presentation is actually adding picture.

But let's not get off-topic...

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by fdm

Include me among those who don't want to know much beyond cast and crew and maybe a brief synopsis when I get around to watching a film... the rest is spoilers.

Part of the problem, I think, is that each person has their own idea of what does or does not constitute a spoiler, and it's sometimes cumbersome trying to accommodate everyone.

An example. Fifteen or so years back, I was a hardcore contributor to a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the show Farscape. At one point, I posted dates and titles for some upcoming episodes as they were announced by the Sci Fi Channel. And I got crap from at least one person who claimed that knowing the episode titles in advance was a spoiler. Which simply boggled my mind. At that point, about 80 or so episodes had aired, and of those 80, there was maybe one in which the title could legitimately be thought of as a spoiler. Others might have been, except that until one had actually seen the episode, the significance of its title was meaningless, so it really wasn't a spoiler.

It made me wonder what these people did when they wanted to watch a movie. Did they avert their eyes when they picked a DVD off the shelf, and when they put it in their player so that they wouldn't see the title? Do they walk up to a theater box office and ask, "I want a ticket to one of your movies, but don't tell me which one, because I want to be surprised"? Would they scream bloody murder if you told them that you were looking forward to the new James Bond movie, Spectre, because they were now spoiled by knowing that the movie has James Bond in it?

I have sympathy for those who don't want to know that the villain is the hero's father, or that guy turns out to be a robot, or Rosebud is...well...you know. But sometimes, I swear, the hardcore spoilerphobes can take the fun out of talking about movies (or whatever).

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Wow that sounds annoying and like a lot of work - its shame they couldn't have left the 4x3 and then have the newer ones 16x9... do they realise they lose image cropping it XD

Well, that's the thing. They aren't cropping it. There's more image on the negative than they composed for. The Director of Photography wasn't inclined to try to accommodate both ratios while shooting, so they didn't make a point of ensuring that there weren't any extraneous people or props outside the 4x3 image area. So digital artists had to paint those things out. Simon also mentioned instances in which the audio might be a voice-over from a character who's not in the frame originally, but is in the wider frame, and because of editing choices, the audio might be out of synch with the video. Or seeing someone on the edges of the wider frame conflicts with the way the scene progressed.

Quite frankly, I think they should've just left it 4x3 (just like, say, the Star Trek shows), but HBO really didn't want to "disenfranchise" potential customers who can't stand not seeing every pixel on their 40-inch (or larger) TV screen lit up. It was a purely commercial decision, and Simon's position was that if it had to happen, better a re-thought composition than a no-thought composition.

[Edward J Grug III]

Criterion don't ship internationally, so them not having a sale isn't hurting me, meanwhile Masters of Cinema keeps having Flash Friday sales! Managed to get a few really cheap Blu Rays of stuff Criterion hasn't released at this point:

Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler
Das Testament Des Dr Mabuse
The Lost Weekend
A Time To Love And A Time To Die
City of Women

And, even though Criterion have released it, I went with their version of

La Notte

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

Criterion don't ship internationally, so them not having a sale isn't hurting me, meanwhile Masters of Cinema keeps having Flash Friday sales! Managed to get a few really cheap Blu Rays of stuff Criterion hasn't released at this point:

Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler
Das Testament Des Dr Mabuse
The Lost Weekend
A Time To Love And A Time To Die
City of Women

And, even though Criterion have released it, I went with their version of

La Notte

Note to self: subscribe to the MoC thread and/or get on their mailing list.

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by octagon

Note to self: subscribe to the MoC thread and/or get on their mailing list.

If you Twitter, that is an excellent source(following the MoC account).

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by octagon

Note to self: subscribe to the MoC thread and/or get on their mailing list.

I hear about them via their Facebook page.

[jlk5844]

Just bought Watership Down on Amazon for $22.49 (westcoastmedia with Prime and no tax). Feels good. Can't effing wait to check this out!

[jmclick]

Great Owl, I very much enjoyed reading your reactions to Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence, and was gratified that you admired it; I had a feeling that you would!

Did you watch the supplemental materials yet? I felt like they really enriched my appreciation for the film, especially the interview with Mr. Sakamoto.

Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence is definitely one of my best blind buys from the Collection.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by jayembee

To a point, yes. There are some 2.39:1 movies that are released in 1.78:1 on Blu-ray (and I tend to refuse watching 2.39:1 films on HBO, because they insist on showing everything in 16x9 "fullscreen"). But some of the A.R. discussions ***** about 1.78 vs. 1.85. The Snowpiercer thread had a fair amount of to and fro about that. While it was clear from some of the comparative screenshots that the US (1.78) release was cropped, it wasn't significant enough to be worth all the sturm und drang.

On the other hand, discussions about which A.R. on Criterion's edition of On the Waterfront is the most aesthetically pleasing, or whether the A.R. of Kino's edition of Marty is a crime against art are certainly discussions worth having.

Well, you're certainly right about the 1.78/1.85 discussions. Anything else though is wrong and should be discussed IMO. If there are 2.39 movies released on blu in 1.78, then they are wrong, too, and should be taken to task. Marty is wrong but I still bought it because the movie is worth owning (and opening up a frame is better to me than cropping the edges, if anything). The Wire is wrong. On the Waterfront is wrong to a degree - should've been released in one AR only, since it was originally shot for 1.85 most likely. Whether or not it was screened in places in 1.33 is irrelevant to me, since the film would've had to have been framed 1.85 first (to ensure all relevant info was on the tighter screen) then just opened up for a wider screen. Same with Marty, although opening up a frame doesn't kill the composition as much, just leaves unruly headroom.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jmclick

Great Owl, I very much enjoyed reading your reactions to Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence, and was gratified that you admired it; I had a feeling that you would!

Did you watch the supplemental materials yet? I felt like they really enriched my appreciation for the film, especially the interview with Mr. Sakamoto.

Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence is definitely one of my best blind buys from the Collection.

I had to go out tonight, but I did have time before I left to watch most of the supplements. The Sakamoto interview was a lot of fun.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by fdm

I think the motivating factor behind all that was that there are too many unflagged spoilers being thrown out and about. The off topic-ness probably wouldn't be such a deal if it weren't for the corresponding risk of having a movie you haven't seen get spoiled in some way. Include me among those who don't want to know much beyond cast and crew and maybe a brief synopsis when I get around to watching a film... the rest is spoilers.

And no, it is not all that easy to read around the spoliers.

I agree too that the spoilers really spoil a lot of things. I'm not tempted to click the "Show Spoiler" link though as much as others. It's all about self-restraint, but when people do forget to tag with spoilers, it is very upsetting. People just need to be more considerate of others these days. Big lack of that overall.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I just finished watching Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence, and I was mesmerized.

David Bowie, who brilliantly utilizes skills that he learned working as a mime in the mid-1960s, delivers the best acting role of his that I have seen. The scenes involving a betrayal from his character's early years must have been difficult for Bowie, because his own half-brother suffered from schizophrenia and committed suicide in 1985. Bowie's 1970 song, "All the Madmen", was written for his half-brother, who was an inmate at a mental institution at the time. Bowie's 1993 song, "Jump They Say", is, in part, an attempt to deal with his half-brother's suicide. Since Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence touches on brotherly responsibility, I can imagine that a lot of thoughts must have been going through Bowie's head during the filming of those scenes.

I quickly recognized actor Takeshi Kitano from his wonderfully skewed role in Battle Royale (2000). I did not realize that he was such an expressive actor in his younger years, and his role drives a lot of the film's driving impact.

Ryûichi Sakamoto's score is superb, and I'm smiling at the fact that one of the tracks was co-written by David Sylvian, who modeled a lot of his early career after David Bowie.

Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence seems to have been quite inspired by David Lean's The Bridge on the River Kwai, and I love how the look of this 1983 Nagisa Oshima film resembles that of a Technicolor 1950s movie.

The film is brutal in many scenes, but it's also quite emotionally resonant with its complex explorations of Japanese values of honor conflicting with the notion of the soldiers running a prison camp.

On a twisted lighter note, one pivotal torture sequence reminds me of the story, "Something to Tide You Over", from the 1982 horror anthology movie, Creepshow.

I'm really glad you enjoyed Merry Christmas Mister Lawrence. It is by far one of my favorite Criterion releases. It stands out because of so many factors, from Bowie's acting to Sakamoto's score to Oshima's brilliant direction. I haven't seen this film in over 2 years but its time I revisit it again. I just remember absolutely connecting with this film on all fronts. I immediately understood this film on all levels. I admired the plight of the characters from all angles. It's simply an amazing film and its about time you saw it!

[cakefactory]

Well, I forced myself to watch the last hour and a half of Breaking the Waves. I had some kind of combined reaction of dread and hatred all the way through to the last chapter.

[Show spoiler]I was almost yelling at the screen hoping they'd get her to the mental institution towards the end where she escaped, and was just furious at all the interactions in the last act with characters where they say exactly the worst thing possible for things to turn out any way other than her getting brutalized to death by Udo Kier and co. I was just livid and wanted there to be a biblical apocalypse in which everyone, especially the doctor and Dodo and Jan and her mother and those rotten old bastards in the church, gets killed by lightning bolts.

Then the last chapter happened, and almost entirely redeemed everything for me. I think the last effects shot of the bells might have been too much, but other than that, damn. It reframes everything and makes it actually sort of a happy ending, and totally redeemed Jan for me (and to some degree the doctor guy and Dodo as well).

I still HATE the music choices on the chapter screens, there's nothing that takes me out of a really raw, lacerating movie than on-the-nose usage of incredibly famous songs, and the way the movie completely stops to do it, repeatedly, really bothered me. It seemed to be at odds with the style of the entire rest of the movie. The main theme is perfect for the tone, Rocket Man and Life on Mars just were annoying to me.

SO yeah, overall, the very last chapter of the movie really redeemed the entire rest of the plot for me when I'd been having a really awful time with it, but I'm not sure if I'm ever going to be able to watch it again. I might be able to, though. Part of why I found the movie so unbearable was having seen Antichrist first, so I was fully expecting

[Show spoiler]there to be an incredibly graphic and extended scene of her being raped to death in that freighter at the end, since the Lars von Trier of Antichrist certainly seems like he would have included that (maybe with some hardcore penetration inserts, too!!!).

Argh. Having that kind of dread hanging over me the entire time would at least not be there on a repeat viewing!

8/10!

[WonderWeasel]

Originally Posted by jw007

To get onto the Criterion wagon again... I watched Time Bandits for the first time last night. It was so very entertaining! This was a night after I watched The Zero Theorem, Gilliam's newest film, which I found to be very amusing too.

I really enjoyed 'The Zero Theorem', as well.

[Show spoiler]It had a very similar feel to 'Brazil' for me, though that could just be the wide-angle lens and odd perspectives of his cinematography. Plus, freakin' Christoph Waltz. I could have done without rapping Tilda Swinton, though.

Has anyone here ever seen Gilliam's 'Tideland'? I've been putting off seeing it because reviews have been so mixed.

...and back to Criterion: Is 'The Music Room' a good introduction to Ray? I found a used copy today but held off because I don't know enough about it.