The Criterion Collection

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

[Show spoiler]innocent families, dedicated law enforcement officers, and entire cities along the Mexican border pay a gruesome price for the ability of the oblivious privileged to enjoy the recreational use of drugs.

Needs some editing...

[Show spoiler]innocent families, dedicated law enforcement officers, and entire cities along the Mexican border pay a gruesome price for the ability of the oblivious government to prohibit drugs.

That's better.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Needs some editing...



That's better.

It still amazes me how many people support this militaristic war on drugs after decades of empirical evidence showing it to be an epic failure.

100 years from now we'll look back on it with the same incredulous bafflement that we look at the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s.

...a policy that essentially turned the American mafia into a Fortune 500 company.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

It still amazes me how many people support this militaristic war on drugs after decades of empirical evidence showing it to be an epic failure.

100 years from now we'll look back on it with the same incredulous bafflement that we look at the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s.

...a policy that essentially turned the American mafia into a Fortune 500 company.

This thread is not the right place for a political debate, but I'll just point out that there is a notable difference between the alcohol prohibition and the current drug laws.

The personal use of alcohol was not outlawed during Prohibition. Prohibition simply forbade the distribution and sale of alcohol, with interstate distribution, in particular, being targeted. This is why you often heard of people, even lawmen, "taking a drink" during the Prohibition years.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This thread is not the right place for a political debate, but I'll just point out that there is a notable difference between the alcohol prohibition and the current drug laws.

The personal use of alcohol was not outlawed during Prohibition. Prohibition simply forbade the distribution and sale of alcohol, with interstate distribution, in particular, being targeted. This is why you often heard of people, even lawmen, "taking a drink" during the Prohibition years.

*Says this is not the right place for a political debate*

*proceeds to engage in political debate*

[Ausjdm]

Originally Posted by Gusto-Guus

Forget about the Maritan. Sicario is the movie to catch this month.

Agreed Sicario looks great! Can't wait to see it since I loved Traffic. The Maritan I read the book so I'm alittle apprehensive watching the movie...

[CriterionBlues]

Skipping the political debate ..

I'll say that Binoche has been beautiful from Rendez-vous to Clouds of Sils Maria. Despite the former having among the weirdest, spitting love scene I've seen in film.

[Ray Jackson]

I think it's awesome that Juliette Binoche turned down a role in Jurassic Park in order to take the role in Blue.

...that tells you everything you need to know about Juliette Binoche.

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I think it's awesome that Juliette Binoche turned down a role in Jurassic Park in order to take the role in Blue.

...that tells you everything you need to know about Juliette Binoche.

She also supposedly took the role in Godzilla to be able to deliver a line of Clouds of Sils Maria more convincingly.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

To be fair it is not the film's fault, I doubt the book it is based on is any different in that regard, the movie is simply a fictional story in space and involving another planet, but mostly grounded in reality, I am not sure I would call it Sci-fi, but on the other hand it involves science and fiction.

That's all it takes for something to be categorized as science fiction. Otherwise it would be like saying that Game of Thrones isn't fantasy, but a political drama that just happens to have dragons and walking dead.

Anyway back to Criterion, aside from Solaris, is there any other thought provoking sci-fi there? I don't think there is enough sci-fi in the collection.

Alphaville (DVD & LD only)
Blade Runner (LD only)
Forbidden Planet (LD only)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (LD only)
La Jetée
Things to Come
2001: A Space Odyssey (LD only)
Videodrome
World on a Wire

And Armageddon provokes the thought "Why did I just waste 2½ hours watching this piece of crap?"

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by jayembee

That's all it takes for something to be categorized as science fiction. Otherwise it would be like saying that Game of Thrones isn't fantasy, but a political drama that just happens to have dragons and walking dead.

I understand, it is just it doesn't fit into any of the more popular science fiction subgenres. Imagine the movie Apollo 13 being made even if those events never occurred in the first place, would it be Science Fiction? I don't think it would fit into the more established definitions of the genre, similar with the movie Gravity.

Anyway, I guess there is so many types of Science fiction that it isn't worth to argue which are and which are not, there are many differences between them and I guess these just happen to be the ones that don't get me too excited as a Sci-fi fan since they don't explore new ideas, which I guess was jw007 point.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

To be fair it is not the film's fault, I doubt the book it is based on is any different in that regard, the movie is simply a fictional story in space and involving another planet, but mostly grounded in reality, I am not sure I would call it Sci-fi, but on the other hand it involves science and fiction.

BTW it is actually "Agnostic" Carl Sagan although I am not sure his mention requires a title.

I also love the themes other works of science fiction brings, but that doesn't mean I automatically give a pass to movies like Prometheus or Interstellar, if anything I feel more frustrated because of all the potential they had.

Anyway back to Criterion, aside from Solaris, is there any other thought provoking sci-fi there? I don't think there is enough sci-fi in the collection.

That last part got me. I agree. Sci fi is my favorite genre as well and so much of it is poorly done in cinema. A great director like Danny Boyle did a superb job with Sunshine, but on the other hand a great director like Brian De Palma could have done so much more with Mission to Mars. Ironically, both directors are in the Criterion Collection. It's becoming clear that Ridley Scott will be known as the "science fiction director" with all these space-setting films he's been making (and has made).

I feel that the great science fiction films will never be in the Criterion Collection because of licensing and that major film companies won't ever license their titles out to 3rd parties such as Janus/Criterion. Great sci fi films like 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner that were once available on Criterion Laserdisc will most likely never see a new reissue on Criterion Blu-ray because of licensing and that they've already been released in great blu-ray packages.

Historical science fiction films of the 1950s such as The Day the Earth Stood Still, War of the Worlds, Destination Moon, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and It Came from Outer Space were great for their time but for me its difficult to watch such dated films. They just haven't aged well in my opinion. Robinson Crusoe on Mars is an oddball and very much reminded me of the classic Star Trek tv show of the mid-late 60s.

I'd really like to see more mid 1990s - early 2000s sci fi films in the Criterion Collection such as 12 Monkeys (1995) (Gilliam's finest movie in my opinion), Soderbergh's remake of Solaris (2002) (an incredibly atmospheric and moody film that is far different from Tarkovsky's original), Dark City (1998) (a philosophically deep film that just came out prior to The Matrix, that borrowed a bit from this film), The Arrival (1996) (incredibly underrated sci fi film which I feel is more superior to Contact, which featured one-dimensional characters) and Gattaca (1997) (a thinking person's sci fi movie in a style that is needed so much more).

[jw007]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

I understand, it is just it doesn't fit into any of the more popular science fiction subgenres. Imagine the movie Apollo 13 being made even if those events never occurred in the first place, would it be Science Fiction? I don't think it would fit into the more established definitions of the genre, similar with the movie Gravity.

Anyway, I guess there is so many types of Science fiction that it isn't worth to argue which are and which are not, there are many differences between them and I guess these just happen to be the ones that don't get me too excited as a Sci-fi fan since they don't explore new ideas, which I guess was jw007 point.

I think a new genre can be created...called the "Sci-survival" genre. Or space survival film...Apollo 13, Gravity and now The Martian all fit neatly in there (emphasizing science over fiction all taking place in space).

[jw007]

Wait...I'm sure someone coined this term before...but... how about "Sci Vi"?

Sci Vi.... Vi is short for surVIval. !

[popcorntreect]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

My review for Sicario...

[Show spoiler]Sicario, which translates to "hitman" in Spanish, is unflinching in its depiction of how innocent families, dedicated law enforcement officers, and entire cities along the Mexican border pay a gruesome price for the ability of the oblivious privileged to enjoy the recreational use of drugs. Emily Blunt, one of my favorite contemporary actresses, plays an FBI agent who is recruited to assist a shadowy joint government team dedicated to tracking down Mexican cartel leaders. This film hits the ground running with a brutal scene involving an FBI discovery of multiple corpses stashed inside a suburban Arizona home, but this scenario barely scratches the surface of the horrors that Blunt's character encounters as she is led by two weathered officials, played by Josh Brolin and Benicio del Toro, through the shellshocked metropolis of Juárez, through haunting border landscapes, and even through dark underground tunnels. Nothing is what it seems in this twisted world, and the motivations of even the closest allies are suspect. Denis Villeneuve's 2013 directorial effort, Prisoners, which stars Hugh Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal, was a good movie that seemed to be missing a special something that would have made it a great movie. Sicario is even more intense and uneasy than Prisoners, but it also comes closer to achieving greatness. This is not a film for the squeamish or those who are easily unsettled, but I personally give it an enthusiastic recommendation, because of its awesome ensemble cast, its ability to shock the viewer with abrupt violence, and its focus on a real-world situation that most news media sources seem oddly reluctant to cover.
Sicario was the second movie that I saw at the theater on a rainy day today, and I watched it immediately after seeing Ridley Scott's The Martian. The Martian illustrated the importance of saving just one precious human life, but Sicario sways the pendulum in the other direction by showing how thousands of lives are discarded like litter for the sake of a murderous industry that thrives on addiction and misery.
Perhaps I'm being overly-optimistic, but I would like to think that Sicario might encourage someone somewhere out there to stay away from Mexico.

There I fixed it for you.

[Show spoiler]I think unlike Traffic, Sicario suffered because it showed no real effects of drugs hitting ordinary U.S. citizens. It reminded me why those scenes of Michael Douglas' daughter in Traffic were so integral to the storyline - because without them, there's no weight.

Overall, I enjoyed it. But I didn't like how they basically neutered Blunt's character about midway through and the final act amounted to a revenge sequence derivative of Breaking Bad. Lastly, I fixed your comment because I felt if there were any takeaways from the film, it was basically, 'don't go to Mexico'.

[Polaroid]

I'd actually say MACBETH is the film to see this year! (So far)

This made me laugh though:

[Groot]

I have watched L’avventura, would you guys recommend Antonioni's Red Desert? It's a blind spot in my Richard Harris film viewing.

[theater dreamer]

Originally Posted by jw007

I think a new genre can be created...called the "Sci-survival" genre. Or space survival film...Apollo 13, Gravity and now The Martian all fit neatly in there (emphasizing science over fiction all taking place in space).

I, too, am a huge science fiction fan (the first film I ever saw in the theaters was Star Wars on opening day in May of 1977), though I am a relative neophyte when it comes to some of the more philosophical films within the genre. I have not yet seen Solaris, so maybe I should put that towards the top of my to purchase list.

You could easily include

[Show spoiler]2010 and Interstellar in this ever-expanding subgenre, as well. In 2010, the crew of the Leonov has to quickly plan their return trajectory months ahead of schedule, as the imminent "something wonderful" turns out to be pretty magnificent for the people on Earth, yet not so hot to those orbiting in close proximity to Jupiter.

In Interstellar, though the impetus for their exploration of the distant galaxy beyond the wormhole is the eventual starvation and suffocation of millions (survival on the grandest of scales), we witness firsthand as Cooper's survival instinct kicks in on Mann's planet. It's one of a few examples of the crew of the Endurance trying to survive in space when confronted with impending doom. They try to save the Endurance from entering into the planet's atmosphere and burning up, as it has no heat shield. They also try to escape the massive gravitational pull of Gargantua, and Cooper and Tars sacrifice themselves so Case may live. True, the theme is not as overt as in something like Apollo 13, where they are facing overwhelming odds throughout the majority of the film, but I think these two films would merit consideration, at least.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jw007

Dark City (1998) (a philosophically deep film that just came out prior to The Matrix, that borrowed a bit from this film)

Funny...

I bought the Blu-ray of Dark City this past weekend, since the Movie Stop down the street from me has a "50% Off all used movies" sale going on, and I was able to buy it for $4 as a result.

I loved Dark City when I saw it at the theater back in 1998. When The Matrix came out the following year, all of my friends were raving about how original it was. I thought that, while The Matrix was a great movie on its own terms, it was simply a more explosive version of Dark City.

I have not, however, seen Dark City since that theater viewing in 1998, though, and I'm looking forward to revisiting it at long last. This time, I'm sure that I'll be more focused on its neo-noir aspects.


At the Movie Stop sale, I also bought Martha Marcy May Marlene, which I consider to be one of the finest movies of the past decade.

[ravenus]

^Yeah, I like DC a good deal more than The Matrix.

[Bob Kramer]

Originally Posted by Groot

I have watched L’avventura, would you guys recommend Antonioni's Red Desert? It's a blind spot in my Richard Harris film viewing.

It's only the greatest color film of all time