The Criterion Collection

[Scottie]

I just rented The Emigrants on iTunes so that I could watch the film because I didn't purchase the Blu-ray...and it's the dubbed version...

Goodbye $2.99.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I just rented The Emigrants on iTunes so that I could watch the film because I didn't purchase the Blu-ray...and it's the dubbed version...

Goodbye $2.99.

Lame!

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

To those who are always requesting more animation in the Criterion Collection, do yourself a favor and pick up this. It's only available until the remainder of the kickstarter leftovers are sold, and it's brilliant

I ran out of money on the Arrow sale!!! nooooooooo!

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

I ran out of money on the Arrow sale!!! nooooooooo!

Both are streaming on Netflix in the US.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by Snicket

Both are streaming on Netflix in the US.

Yeah but I want the blurayyyy :P (have watched them on netflix) amazing films!

-

Was discussed on here a while back but recently re watched Ex Machina with full attention (even had my philip hue lights match the film to draw me in!) and completely different experience and loved it! Seemed to get more from it this time - I still prefer Under the Skin when comparing the two, but yeah thoroughly enjoyed it and was more drawn in than before. Although some of the CGI did bug me, and most the time it was great, however there were some moments where it was too obvious which did distract me at times... but still great achievement and will probs get on bluray now!

Parts of it really reminded me of Beyond the Black Rainbow as well!

[MifuneFan]

I caught World of Tomorrow on Netflix, it's brilliant. Very tempted to get that release

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by Snicket

Both are streaming on Netflix in the US.

Ah Netflix has started blocking VPNs... damn it... Canada had some of the best films on it! UK sucks for Netflix.

[Scottie]

Am I the only one who dislikes It's Such a Beautiful Day?

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Am I the only one who dislikes It's Such a Beautiful Day?

Yes?

[Show spoiler]

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Snicket

Since this is Criterion related, and I would rather slit my eyeballs open than wander into the movies section, here you go:

Knight of Cups


The first trailer for Knight of Cups was full of all the electric energy that one would expect to find in any recent work by David Fincher. After the pensive To The Wonder it looked like Knight of Cups may be a new benchmark in style for Malick. The marketing team did a great job in jazzing up the film to make it near presentable for a mainstream audience; they also completely failed the film by jazzing it up. None of that is the fault of the film or it's director however.

Christian Bale is stranded in a desert as a voice over from a priest like figure begins a Pilgrims Progress like oration about the follies of man, the quest to return to ones self, and other spiritual maxims that will drive Bale's quest back to feeling alive. The premise is one of Malick's strongest in years. The backdrop of LA nightlife, and later a trip to Las Vegas provides a rich visual pool (and literal pool as well, as it's rare to go more than 5 minutes without a shoot of someones pool) for Emmanuel Lubezki to draw from, and as expected, the film is gorgeous. Overlapping Pilgrims Progress with vapid Hollywood culture, fame, success, new age philosophy, raves, and sex is the films strongest hand.

Unfortunately the film strays from it's strengths to venture into side stories that really bog down the structure and are indicative of Malick at his worst. We are introduced to Bale's family, his brother and father, who have a rough relationship, as we have now come to expect. Once Bale's father begins to guide much of the voice over, the film being to stray into a vague and ponderous direction that happily kept at bay during the films first three quarters. Also an odd choice, as Bale's father is portrayed as an antagonist, but suddenly become a sort of spiritual guide late in the game. A confusing character arc but trying to follow narrative here is a fool's errand.

Bale does a mostly fine job as the film's lead. He is most often required to aimlessly wander from once experience to the next, not really show much emotion, and often walking behind others as a sort of bored tourist in his own life. The other top billed actors, Cate Blanchett and Natalie Portman (who shows up late in the game) are right at home in Malick's style, he seemingly asks nothing and everything of his actors. There are a trio of women in the film who are not receiving enough credit however, Freida Pinto, Teresa Palmer and especially Imogen Poots are all notably fantastic in their roles, and play well into Malick's style. They each, along with Portman and Blanchett have their own unique pull on Bale as he searches for a life he can call his own. An interesting choice that piques my curiosity about how Malick feels about women, especially considering this is his most sexual film to date. Thankfully though Malick is not too harsh in his male gaze with the camera, as he explores sex and nudity with the same cinematic curiosity he explores a sidewalk or a fish.

True to form the film also features many cameos of triple A talent that play as little more than background. Antonio Banderas and Nick Offerman among them, who were lucky enough to not have all their lines cut. To be in the film at all would be considered a big win.

In the end Knight of Cups is a little too long and a little too ponderous to make a lasting impression. The film says everything it needs to in the first three quarters and is really just covering the same old ground in it's last. Although it's supporting cast and cinematography make it worth the watch completely. I'm glad Terrence Malick gets to make films, we need more filmmakers like him who get to be uncompromising and make exactly what they want to. They may not always paint the Mona Lisa, but the art is theirs. And that's something that most filmmakers don't get to claim.

Well written and well thought out. I read every word and that is something I rarely do with reviews on this site - especially lengthy ones.

What I still can't figure out, however, is what (21st century) Malick has done to earn yours and so many other people's consideration. It all chalks up to a matter of opinion, but I think that the art he claims (as you say) is more comparable to the construction paper my 2 year old son's day care teachers give me and my wife at the end of the week than it is to the Mona Lisa.

That just me, though.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Am I the only one who dislikes It's Such a Beautiful Day?

No. Most certainly not.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Well written and well thought out. I read every word and that is something I rarely do with reviews on this site - especially lengthy ones.

What I still can't figure out, however, is what (21st century) Malick has done to earn yours and so many other people's consideration. It all chalks up to a matter of opinion, but I think that the art he claims (as you say) is more comparable to the construction paper my 2 year old son's day care teachers give me and my wife at the end of the week than it is to the Mona Lisa.

That just me, though.

Tree of Life. Potentially his best film.

Both Scorsese and Spielberg haven't really put out a great film in a over decade, but they still have people's admiration for their work as a whole. I don't see why it shouldn't be different with Malick, although I regard Tree of Life extremely highly.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

Tree of Life. Potentially his best film.

Both Scorsese and Spielberg haven't really put out a great film in a over decade, but they still have people's admiration for their work as a whole. I don't see why it shouldn't be different with Malick, although I regard Tree of Life extremely highly.

I think TTOL is better than anything Scorsese or Spielberg have put out in this century. People don't really gush over their new releases, though, either - especially when Malick's new film is getting awful reviews. Will it be direct to video? Is it even getting an engagement somewhere?

[demonknight]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

Tree of Life. Potentially his best film.

Both Scorsese and Spielberg haven't really put out a great film in a over decade, but they still have people's admiration for their work as a whole. I don't see why it shouldn't be different with Malick, although I regard Tree of Life extremely highly.

Excuse me. Hugo and The Wolf of Wall Street are both phenomenal Scorsese films.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I think TTOL is better than anything Scorsese or Spielberg have put out in this century. People don't really gush over their new releases, though, either - especially when Malick's new film is getting awful reviews. Will it be direct to video? Is it even getting an engagement somewhere?

Knight of Cups is playing in a theatre by me now (and I live in the 77th biggest city in the US, so not exactly a huge market).

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by demonknight

Excuse me. Hugo and The Wolf of Wall Street are both phenomenal Scorsese films.

I had a hard time even getting through Hugo, so it was pretty far from phenomenal for me.

I liked Wolf alright, but it didn't seem anywhere near the calibre of Scorsese's best films.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Well written and well thought out. I read every word and that is something I rarely do with reviews on this site - especially lengthy ones.

What I still can't figure out, however, is what (21st century) Malick has done to earn yours and so many other people's consideration. It all chalks up to a matter of opinion, but I think that the art he claims (as you say) is more comparable to the construction paper my 2 year old son's day care teachers give me and my wife at the end of the week than it is to the Mona Lisa.

That just me, though.

I think that The Tree of Life is perhaps the best cinematic depiction of childhood, except maybe for Stand By Me. I love how The Tree of Life walks us through moments in childhood that are universally relatable (our first encounter with death, our first "Mine! Mine! Mine!" moment from early childhood, our first infatuation, our first time defying a parent, our first experience moving away from a home, our first time hearing our parents argue, etc.).

The universal issues of adulthood are captured with grace as well. In fact, I related quite a bit to Brad Pitt's character. As a younger man, he had dreamed about being a musician, but ultimately chose a more "practical" job that erodes his soul.


I also love To the Wonder for reasons that I've stated many times in this thread. My only problem with To the Wonder, in fact, was that it was not filmed in the 1960s and that it did not star Alain Delon and Monica Vitti.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Well written and well thought out. I read every word and that is something I rarely do with reviews on this site - especially lengthy ones.

What I still can't figure out, however, is what (21st century) Malick has done to earn yours and so many other people's consideration. It all chalks up to a matter of opinion, but I think that the art he claims (as you say) is more comparable to the construction paper my 2 year old son's day care teachers give me and my wife at the end of the week than it is to the Mona Lisa.

That just me, though.

I loved you bw.

You were my brother.

We fought together.

Bled together.

Rode majestic, translucent steeds together, shooting flaming arrows across the bridge of Hemdale.

...and you betrayed me.

If I should ever pass you along in life and you are laying there, dying of thirst, I would not give you a drink of water.

I would let the vultures take you and do whatever they want with you with no ill regrets.

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I also love To the Wonder for reasons that I've stated many times in this thread. My only problem with To the Wonder, in fact, was that it was not filmed in the 1960s and that it did not star Alain Delon and Monica Vitti.

Owl knows what's up. This criticism could be applied to most films, really.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

I had a hard time even getting through Hugo, so it was pretty far from phenomenal for me.

Yes, i felt the exact same way.
Didn't touch me at all...