The Criterion Collection

[adamhopelies]

1. Probably Every Man For Himself, as it came out of the blue.

2. Given that they're probably not going to be handling Out 1 in the US, I'll go with Histoire(s) du cinéma.

[adamhopelies]

Re-De Palma and Hitch. I'd thoroughly recommend Un-American Psycho: Brian De Palma and the Political Invisible by Chris Dumas to anyone keen to examine this line of enquiry further. I only really got in to De Palma last year, and when seeking out a good book on his work this was the one that pretty much everyone mentioned. It examines De Palma's work against a framework of Hitchcock, Godard and Coppola, and is pretty provocative in the way it treats the hallowed rules of film studies in general.

As for De Palma's work in general, I really like Dressed To Kill, Blow Out, Sisters, Fury and Obsession. Controversially perhaps, I'm also quite fond of Mission To Mars! Carrie was the one that really didn't click for me, while I found Phantom Of The Paradise, which was the film I was REALLY looking forward to when embarking upon my De Palma project, to be almost unbearably annoying. I blame Paul Williams.

[Angel Eyes]

Originally Posted by iScottie

The only Brian De Palma film I like is Passion. In fact, I love it.

Blow Out is solid, but the others...

His best film was The Untouchables. But Criterion should get its hands on Casualties of War!

[welcometothepartypal]

Originally Posted by Angel Eyes

His best film was The Untouchables. But Criterions should get its hands on Casualties of War!

I thought Untouchables was great(haven't seen it in years) As far as CofWar, Michael J Fox (whom I love) was either very miscast or needed better direction.
This is the problem I have with a lot of Depalma films: Bad acting. In both Dressed to Kill and Blow out, you've got some great solid actors/ enter Nancy Allen.

I'm one of those people that is turned off immediately if one of the main actors stinks. If they all stink it's one thing. But co-starring with Caine and Travolta, Nancy just stuck out like a sour thumb and it ruins the whole experience for me. She needed better direction as I believe MJF did in CofWar(although MJF was and always has been a natural compared to Nancy). Nancy was good in Robocop. It seems Depalma is not an actors director, he just hires who he thinks is best, which they mostly are and just lets them do there thing. But some of them need a little help.

I guess I'm one of the people that shrugs when I hear Depalmas' name. I can take him or leave him, I do need to get a copy of The Untouchables as I remember loving it.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by Angel Eyes

His best film was The Untouchables. But Criterions should get its hands on Casualties of War!

I would love that too since I love Vietnam war films.
Apart from the documentary I don't think Criterion has released any.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

what is Gus Van Sants Psycho like?

I can't think of a word strong enough to describe how terrible it is.

[Visco.]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I can't think of a word strong enough to describe how terrible it is.

And it's not even his worst movie.

[PowellPressburger]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

what is Gus Van Sants Psycho like? I have never seen, but I'm a huge fan of his films,

People do bash it horribly but I understand Van Sant was trying to have fun doing his kind of costly film experiment. I liked some of what Julianne Moore did with her character.

Anne Heche was an interesting choice and she noted she had never seen the original movie before but they watched it on the set as they filmed, but it was like she was trying NOT to do everything Janet Leigh did with her dialogue. At first I hated what they did with the look of the Psycho house (new facade built in front of original) I think it works well with the film. I know people give Vince Vaughn crap over his acting in Psycho but I liked it when he took chances with some roles and didn't go full comedy hopefully True Detective will get him back into dramas and out of playing himself in every other comedy he is in.

The one thing I LOVED about the remake and we have yet to get a full CD release but the newly arranged Herrmann score by Danny Elfman and Steve Bartek. I know some cues were changed but I would love to have the complete score they did on disc.

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I can't think of a word strong enough to describe how terrible it is.

I actually think it's a pretty interesting movie, and the cast is great (Julianne Moore, William H. Macy, Philip Baker Hall; we're only a John C. Reilly away from a PTA movie here!). Obviously it's not a patch on the Hitchcock film, but I'm glad it exists for curiosities sake if nothing else.

[Angel Eyes]

Originally Posted by welcometothepartypal

I thought Untouchables was great(haven't seen it in years) As far as CofWar, Michael J Fox (whom I love) was either very miscast or needed better direction.
This is the problem I have with a lot of Depalma films: Bad acting. In both Dressed to Kill and Blow out, you've got some great solid actors/ enter Nancy Allen.

I'm one of those people that is turned off immediately if one of the main actors stinks. If they all stink it's one thing. But co-starring with Caine and Travolta, Nancy just stuck out like a sour thumb and it ruins the whole experience for me. She needed better direction as I believe MJF did in CofWar(although MJF was and always has been a natural compared to Nancy). Nancy was good in Robocop. It seems Depalma is not an actors director, he just hires who he thinks is best, which they mostly are and just lets them do there thing. But some of them need a little help.

I guess I'm one of the people that shrugs when I hear Depalmas' name. I can take him or leave him, I do need to get a copy of The Untouchables as I remember loving it.

Nancy Allen cant act....but that was his wife so he was going to cast her! :P

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by adamhopelies

I actually think it's a pretty interesting movie, and the cast is great (Julianne Moore, William H. Macy, Philip Baker Hall; we're only a John C. Reilly away from a PTA movie here!). Obviously it's not a patch on the Hitchcock film, but I'm glad it exists for curiosities sake if nothing else.

I was so incredibly disgusted by Gus Van Sant's version that I refused to see the Hitchcock version for the first time until a couple of years ago.

[bwdowiak]

“Late Hitchcock,” “past his prime Hitchcock,” however one wishes to call it, Frenzy is just a plain good film! Without spoiling anything, the one scene that people are referring to might be the most risqué, but it is hardly the selling point of the film and isn’t where its heart and soul lies. Consider the suspense during the potato sack sequence or the subtle subtext of people devouring their prey (count how many food references there are in this film!) I haven’t seen anything from Argento, but Hitch did not work in the slasher genre. His strengths were always in the fact that what is suggested is more terrifying than what is actually on display. Although it is understandable, the fact that the evolution of the horror/slasher genre can be traced back to the Hitch’s style is almost an accident. That isn’t to take anything away from any directors who have made artful films (probably more so in a campy way,) but I personally think they have little in common with Hitch. Kind of like how Nirvana changed the landscape of hard rock music in the early 90’s and opened the door for one million and one crap bands.

Probably not my most lucid thoughts on the subject, but I had to throw in my two cents.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I was so incredibly disgusted by Gus Van Sant's version that I refused to see the Hitchcock version for the first time until a couple of years ago.

gosh! if I had made the mistake of seeing the GVS version of Pscyho prior to seeing the original, I might have asked God for a do-over on life.

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

One person's sleazy and gratuitous is another person's mood setter or bit of realism. I tend to be in the "they're just boobs" camp and not see it as sleazy or jarring in any way, but I know a lot of people (in America especially) feel differently.

In any event I think De Palma being a more 80's style Hitchcock is something he would take as a compliment. Also I tend to think the definition of "high art" depends on who you ask, and is a wholly subjective (and thus useless) term.

Hmm, I'm not sure what this post is trying to accomplish? It feels like an attempt to undermine everything I said just because it's an opinion.

[Norbie]

Does anyone know where to get amaray cases that Criterion use for their standar 1 disc releases. Also if they are available in the slightly fatter cases like the All That Heaven Allows release?

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

gosh! if I had made the mistake of seeing the GVS version of Pscyho prior to seeing the original, I might have asked God for a do-over on life.

I think Ebert had once asked him why the film was made. GVS said he made it so nobody else would try to re-make it.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

People do bash it horribly but I understand Van Sant was trying to have fun doing his kind of costly film experiment. I liked some of what Julianne Moore did with her character.

Anne Heche was an interesting choice and she noted she had never seen the original movie before but they watched it on the set as they filmed, but it was like she was trying NOT to do everything Janet Leigh did with her dialogue. At first I hated what they did with the look of the Psycho house (new facade built in front of original) I think it works well with the film. I know people give Vince Vaughn crap over his acting in Psycho but I liked it when he took chances with some roles and didn't go full comedy hopefully True Detective will get him back into dramas and out of playing himself in every other comedy he is in.

The one thing I LOVED about the remake and we have yet to get a full CD release but the newly arranged Herrmann score by Danny Elfman and Steve Bartek. I know some cues were changed but I would love to have the complete score they did on disc.

Had Van Sant been smart, like Hitch, he would've done exactly what the original film did - throw the audience for a loop. In the original, the lead actress was killed 45 minutes in. So Van Sant should've staged the shower scene, then had her live (or escape), something anyone who'd seen the original was not expecting. Then the 2nd half of the film could've been different, and at least it could've stood as a crazy (although terribly acted) alternate version of what could've happened. In trying to do Hitchcock, Van Sant forgot to actually DO Hitchcock.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

Hmm, I'm not sure what this post is trying to accomplish? It feels like an attempt to undermine everything I said just because it's an opinion.

That's a cynical way to put it I guess. The point was perspective, a reminder that the things you're saying are from one perspective but there are others. Every forum debate is a comparison of opinions really, I was just presenting the other side.

[anthonyb]

Originally Posted by Norbie

Does anyone know where to get amaray cases that Criterion use for their standar 1 disc releases. Also if they are available in the slightly fatter cases like the All That Heaven Allows release?

http://www.casetopia.com/category_s/1820.htm

The 1-disc cases are apparently on backorder right now, though.

[mrjohnnyb]

Originally Posted by Angel Eyes

Nancy Allen cant act....but that was his wife so he was going to cast her! :P

I thought that her acting was better in Carrie, however I thought that John Travolta had several bad acting moments in that film.