The Criterion Collection

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Ive already commented on the film after seeing it ages ago....

Worse than I expected tbh, but if you guys enjoy then great.

I don't think you saw it, but that's ok. I was just up for some good natured ribbing today. That's all.

[CriterionBlues]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I've given up on Le Samourai.

Jon Mulvaney once said, "The world is a find place and worth fighting for."

...I agree with the second part.

My feeling is they are saving Samourai to kick off 2016. It hit iTunes at a similar time as Lady Snowblood, so I'll predict them both as a January release.

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I don't think you saw it, but that's ok. I was just up for some good natured ribbing today. That's all.

I saw it & it honestly wasn't bad. It's a fun movie similar to House. It's the release I'm most excited for in Dec.

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by CriterionBlues

My feeling is they are saving Samourai to kick off 2016. It hit iTunes at a similar time as Lady Snowblood, so I'll predict them both as a January release.

I hope so. I'd love to upgrade my DVD copy of Le Samourai & I've been holding off on buying the Arrow release of Lady Snowblood in anticipation of a Criterion release.

[Brad1963]

Isn't the hold-up with Le Samouraï the lack of a decent HD transfer available to them? I thought they were trying to find the right elements to re-master it themselves.

[CriterionBlues]

Originally Posted by Brad1963

Isn't the hold-up with Le Samouraï the lack of a decent HD transfer available to them? I thought they were trying to find the right elements to re-master it themselves.

I haven't heard this, at least not recently.

The iTunes transfer has an HD option. I haven't DL'ed and won't, but the other iTunes releases (like Watership Down) were comparable to the physical release.

[Fabs]

Originally Posted by darkness2918

I hope so. I'd love to upgrade my DVD copy of Le Samourai & I've been holding off on buying the Arrow release of Lady Snowblood in anticipation of a Criterion release.

I was thinking the same, but went ahead with the Arrow. It's only $12.99 from the Arrow store, with free shipping. Also, I don't know how Criterion can improve on the release unless they get some kind of interview with Meiko Kaji. Lastly, it may be a long time before Criterion gets to it. There's a bunch of films people waited nearly forever to get, despite knowing Criterion was going to release them in the future.

[monorail91]

Dude I haven't seen Jellyfish Eyes and probably won't for a while, but all the hate around it is crazy. There's bigger CC (jelly)fish to fry.

While no one release particularly irks me (beyond my own dislike of a particular film), it does bug me that Wes Anderson has the deal with them. It's very pretentious of him, and somewhat naive of Criterion, to say his movies going forward should be considered "important" films. He can (and arguably does) put out crap and no matter what it's Criterion? Thanks but no thanks!

[Fabs]

Originally Posted by monorail91

Dude I haven't seen Jellyfish Eyes and probably won't for a while, but all the hate around it is crazy. There's bigger CC (jelly)fish to fry.

While no one release particularly irks me (beyond my own dislike of a particular film), it does bug me that Wes Anderson has the deal with them. It's very pretentious of him, and somewhat naive of Criterion, to say his movies going forward should be considered "important" films. He can (and arguably does) put out crap and no matter what it's Criterion? Thanks but no thanks!

I think at this point, we should forget about Criterion's purpose. They've released the most important films of the past and recent times, but now I think they put out whatever they feel like. Sure, they upgrade and still release films that are important or interesting. But I think they're more focused on releasing films they know will sell well (Wes Anderson, David Cronenberg, Terry Gilliam, The Big Chill, Tootsie, David Lynch, Brian De Palma, etc). Now, these films aren't bad. Most of them are really great films. But most don't really need a release. They're already available.

And people say all the time that Criterion pushes out stuff like Wes Anderson to get more money to release obscure stuff. And while that's partly true, I don't get how Eureka/Masters of Cinema doesn't release these kinds of films but still manages to put out a ton of obscure and important films that really don't have a huge market.

[mja345]

Hypothetical question. What would be the film that would shock you the absolute most if Criterion released it? Say you're at work on the 15th of the month reloading Criterion's page to see the announcements, you take a sip of coffee and spit it out over your computer screen due to complete disbelief. A film so antithetical to Criterion's mission statement of important films that it leaves one speechless.

The temptation would be to answer with a colossal piece of shit like "Gigli", but then one could argue that "Gigli" has reached a level of importance due to its fascinating level of ineptitude. There are scenes in that film that reach a surreal pitch of, "What the hell was everyone thinking?" I think I'd have to say "Jack and Jill", which is as bad or worse than "Gigli", but there is nothing fascinating about how awful it is.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by mja345

Hypothetical question. What would be the film that would shock you the absolute most if Criterion released it? Say you're at work on the 15th of the month reloading Criterion's page to see the announcements, you take a sip of coffee and spit it out over your computer screen due to complete disbelief. A film so antithetical to Criterion's mission statement of important films that it leaves one speechless.

The temptation would be to answer with a colossal piece of shit like "Gigli", but then one could argue that "Gigli" has reached a level of importance due to its fascinating level of ineptitude. There are scenes in that film that reach a surreal pitch of, "What the hell was everyone thinking?" I think I'd have to say "Jack and Jill", which is as bad or worse than "Gigli", but there is nothing fascinating about how awful it is.

Rollergator Rap - YouTube

[Roninblues]

Originally Posted by mja345

Hypothetical question. What would be the film that would shock you the absolute most if Criterion released it? Say you're at work on the 15th of the month reloading Criterion's page to see the announcements, you take a sip of coffee and spit it out over your computer screen due to complete disbelief. A film so antithetical to Criterion's mission statement of important films that it leaves one speechless.

The temptation would be to answer with a colossal piece of shit like "Gigli", but then one could argue that "Gigli" has reached a level of importance due to its fascinating level of ineptitude. There are scenes in that film that reach a surreal pitch of, "What the hell was everyone thinking?" I think I'd have to say "Jack and Jill", which is as bad or worse than "Gigli", but there is nothing fascinating about how awful it is.

Deep Throat/Behind the Green Door/Debbie Does Dallas Digipack

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I don't think you saw it, but that's ok. I was just up for some good natured ribbing today. That's all.

Well I have seen it... *yawn*

Originally Posted by darkness2918

I saw it & it honestly wasn't bad. It's a fun movie similar to House. It's the release I'm most excited for in Dec.

Its nothing like Hausu lol

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Well I have seen it... *yawn*



Its nothing like Hausu lol

That's your opinion but like the other person said I too doubt you've seen it. And to me its a fun movie to watch just like House was a fun movie which is what I meant. You praised Don't Look Now awhile back & I thought that movie was a boring mess. See, opinions

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by Fabs

I think at this point, we should forget about Criterion's purpose. They've released the most important films of the past and recent times, but now I think they put out whatever they feel like. Sure, they upgrade and still release films that are important or interesting. But I think they're more focused on releasing films they know will sell well (Wes Anderson, David Cronenberg, Terry Gilliam, The Big Chill, Tootsie, David Lynch, Brian De Palma, etc). Now, these films aren't bad. Most of them are really great films. But most don't really need a release. They're already available.

And people say all the time that Criterion pushes out stuff like Wes Anderson to get more money to release obscure stuff. And while that's partly true, I don't get how Eureka/Masters of Cinema doesn't release these kinds of films but still manages to put out a ton of obscure and important films that really don't have a huge market.

I personally like the Cronenberg, Lynch & De Palma stuff Criterion release.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by darkness2918

That's your opinion but like the other person said I too doubt you've seen it. And to me its a fun movie to watch just like House was a fun movie which is what I meant. You praised Don't Look Now awhile back & I thought that movie was a boring mess. See, opinions

Ok so I have a negative opinion on a film in the Criterion Collection, thus I am a liar.

This message board is full of nice people isn't it.

Besides, if you bothered to read my last comments when I saw it a while back, I did comment on how the action scenes were well choreographed and put together. I just thought it was a very cheap looking production, it would have suited early morning TV for kids.

Oh the intro sequence was cool though.

[Meggs2015]

Another month goes by, with an uninspiring (to me), December releases. Are we ever going to see The Decalogue?

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Ok so I have a negative opinion on a film in the Criterion Collection, thus I am a liar.

This message board is full of nice people isn't it.

Besides, if you bothered to read my last comments when I saw it a while back, I did comment on how the action scenes were well choreographed and put together. I just thought it was a very cheap looking production, it would have suited early morning TV for kids.

Oh the intro sequence was cool though.

Seems like you lost all credibility haha, not sure why everyone is against you, I don't like to criticize movies I haven't seen, but I also won't blindly defend them just because Criterion puts them out.

I try to watch all Criterion release, and for me some of them have been pretty bad, even some respected ones, but I guess that is just my opinion, I mean for what it's worth, I never had hopes for Tiny Furniture, and once I saw it I didn't like it, same with Hausu.

I guess in this case you have to put serious spoilers just so that someone who already seen it can believe you

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by darkness2918

I personally like the Cronenberg, Lynch & De Palma stuff Criterion release.

Also many of those releases didn't had current blu-rays at least not US releases.

Personally I feel that while Mulholland Dr. is a somewhat recent film, it is as essential to the Criterion Collection as La Dolce Vita or Seven Samurai, it has been constantly climbing to the top of popular top films lists, and it is destined to be a classic.

[ElliesDad]

Originally Posted by Fabs

I think at this point, we should forget about Criterion's purpose. They've released the most important films of the past and recent times, but now I think they put out whatever they feel like. Sure, they upgrade and still release films that are important or interesting. But I think they're more focused on releasing films they know will sell well...

[Show spoiler] (Wes Anderson, David Cronenberg, Terry Gilliam, The Big Chill, Tootsie, David Lynch, Brian De Palma, etc). Now, these films aren't bad. Most of them are really great films. But most don't really need a release. They're already available.

And people say all the time that Criterion pushes out stuff like Wes Anderson to get more money to release obscure stuff. And while that's partly true, I don't get how Eureka/Masters of Cinema doesn't release these kinds of films but still manages to put out a ton of obscure and important films that really don't have a huge market.

You may have missed the press release: "Criterion has, in keeping with new acquisition, production, and distribution standards and policy, announced that they are currently revising their mission statement, and that effective as of the first of next month it will read as follows: 'Criterion Collection, a continuing series of classic and contemporary films which may be important to someone, somewhere.' "

Don't get me wrong, I've been a huge Criterion supporter for years and when they hit the mark it's a joy to behold. That said, a good number of their releases this year have ranged from questionable to incomprehensible (nothing to be gained here by providing examples) and what makes this in fact so frustrating is that the Criterion product is so good.

If another company chooses to issue a mix of good films and turkeys, so what. But when the availability of blu-ray releases of so many great (and important) films seems to be rapidly diminishing and when so many of the ones that are available have been poorly mastered, it is always disappointing when a Criterion slot goes to a lesser, to be generous, release. For every Tiny Furniture or My Winnipeg that comes along another Nights of Cabiria or Roman Holiday, or Horseman on the Roof, or A Very Long Engagement, or an extended edition of Cinema Paradiso languishes, perhaps never to see the light of day.

Ok, I'm done...