The Criterion Collection

[812crew]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Bergman thought Antonioni sucked.

I believe it. I feel their approach to moviemaking is pretty different. Antonioni chose to try and say more with the images. Bergman was good with images, but he liked words. A lot.

Anyway, whether or not one can get into an Antonioni movie, or connect with it emotionally or intellectually, a google image search of "L'avventura" or "La Notte" will turn up, in my opinion, some of the best shots ever in movies. Even as purely visual movies, they're still worth owning in my opinion.

As a side note: Bergman also thought Hitchcock was "infantile".

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by joie

Isn't that a fake novel? And Criterion's cover an altered fake of a fake novel's cover?

[SammyJankis]

Art for Clouds of Sils Maria is up:

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

Art for Clouds of Sils Maria is up:

I LIKE! :O (Although I would have made Binoche's face a little moe transparent as it sticks out too much compared to rest of the imagery!)

Make me want to revisit the film :P!

[imsounoriginal]

^ Why does the art say year 2000 on it?

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

^ Why does the art say year 2000 on it?

Lol I noticed that - weird!

[cakefactory]

Eh, I'm sure it will be fixed by the actual release.

I wish there was an alternate cut on that disc. That movie was great up until

[Show spoiler]Kristen Stewart disappeared

, but the rest of the movie felt COMPLETELY pointless. The whole last act felt like a never-ending epilogue and didn't seem to have anything to do with what had seemed to be the primary focus of the movie up until that point. It seemed like either something was missing that would have made the last act make more sense, or that they'd filmed the stuff with Chloe Moretz and figured they'd better stick it in since they paid her. I would have been happy just seeing her in the fake movie earlier in the film.

[Reddington]

Not a Criterion release, but this is perhaps the best forum to ask for thoughts on Rivette's Out 1. I'd never even heard of it until recently when I was reading about films Michael Lonsdale has acted in. My knowledge of French cinema and New Wave directors is in its infancy, and I am well aware this film is likely considered "advanced" viewing (not that I completely believe in the concept of "learned appreciation"). But as the "limited" edition BD box-set can currently be had for just over $50, it is an intriguing - albeit somewhat risky - blind buy. Grateful for comments from those more knowledgeable. Thanks.

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by Reddington

Not a Criterion release, but this is perhaps the best forum to ask for thoughts on Rivette's Out 1. I'd never even heard of it until recently when I was reading about films Michael Lonsdale has acted in. My knowledge of French cinema and New Wave directors is in its infancy, and I am well aware this film is likely considered "advanced" viewing (not that I completely believe in the concept of "learned appreciation"). But as the "limited" edition BD box-set can currently be had for just over $50, it is an intriguing - albeit somewhat risky - blind buy. Grateful for comments from those more knowledgeable. Thanks.

I recently watched the film for a second time, via the UK Blu-ray. I don't think it's particularly inaccessible: it might be intimidating starting out but you soon relax in to the rhythm of the thing. Following my first viewing of the film some time ago I'd pushed it to one side as lesser Rivette, in terms of the quality but after this most recent viewing I'm actually tempted to declare it his greatest achievement. I would actually recommend it to a newbie now, though it might be worth taking a look at something like Celine And Julie Go Boating first.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

I LIKE! :O (Although I would have made Binoche's face a little moe transparent as it sticks out too much compared to rest of the imagery!)

Make me want to revisit the film :P!

See I thought they should have showed Binoche putting on lipstick and big red earrings.

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

Eh, I'm sure it will be fixed by the actual release.

I wish there was an alternate cut on that disc. That movie was great up until

[Show spoiler]Kristen Stewart disappeared

, but the rest of the movie felt COMPLETELY pointless. The whole last act felt like a never-ending epilogue and didn't seem to have anything to do with what had seemed to be the primary focus of the movie up until that point. It seemed like either something was missing that would have made the last act make more sense, or that they'd filmed the stuff with Chloe Moretz and figured they'd better stick it in since they paid her. I would have been happy just seeing her in the fake movie earlier in the film.

Couldn't disagree more, respectfully. I thought the movie was intriguing even though I did not love it. The last act in my opinion really brought everything home, although it is ambiguous. The part you spoilered was a great decision, again in my opinion.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by 812crew

As a side note: Bergman also thought Hitchcock was "infantile".

Interesting. I didn't know that. I haven't really connected (in an 'OMG' type way) with any of the Bergman films I've seen. Regarding Antonioni, it seems that while L'Avventura may have the most fans, feelings on his work is pretty divided. I thought L'Eclisse was an insufferable watch. I liked Blow Up and I know many hate that one.

[TomN245]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Bergman thought Antonioni sucked.

and yet they both died on the same day

[Fabs]

Originally Posted by Helter145

So, there hasn't been much discussion here in relation to the lack of female-directed films on the collection, which surprises me, as several articles on the subject have been making the rounds since film critic Sophie Mayer analyzed Criterion's entire output and found out that only 21 films out of almost 800 were directed by women, and we need to realize that a lot of those are only available through Criterion's Eclipse banner and through the DVD format, so the number becomes even more meagre when counting only the blu-ray format, some very appealing and historically-important films, like Vera Chytilová's Daisies and Larisa Shepitko's The Ascent, have been denied a blu-ray release, being instead buried under the Eclipse banner, which, sure, is better than nothing, but still problematic, as some articles have mentioned how obscure male-directed films such as Marketa Lazarova have been given the deluxe treatment, and that film is I think as important or as deserving as the also Czech Daisies...

This obviously is not only Criterion's fault, that meagre number of 21 speaks of a much larger issue, one related to the gender-bias of the film industry at large and of the movie-buying public, and sometimes there's not a restoration available or there are licensing issues, which can take years to clear, so the fact that some films like Lucrecia Martel's La Ciénaga have seen the light of day on blu-ray is a small miracle in and of itself, yet there so many films out there still unavailable on any format that it's kind of difficult to feel overtly optimistic....

This is definitely a difficult subject, and while I do think Criterion has been oblivious of some very fine female-directed films, ultimately not to talk about the bigger picture would be a mistake, and still, we as buyers should put our money where our mouth is and consume as much of something we want represented...

Is it really Criterion's fault that the majority of the films directed in the world have been directed by men? I could complain all day that there is no Naruse on Blu Ray, but the fact remains that there are many factors as to why a film is DVD only and not out on Blu Ray.

[malakaheso]

Originally Posted by Helter145

and ultimately even within Hollywood there are some great female filmmakers developing unconventional, off-beat projects, think of Sofia Coppola, Kathryn Bigelow, Lynne Ramsay and Jane Campion, and sure sometimes they are subjected to an amount of criticism and scrutiny that would not be there were they male, but I think the general attitude is slowly changing...

What type of 'criticism' and 'scrutiny' do they face that other male directors wouldn't? I find the claim for this 'scrutiny' is far stronger than the actual evidence.

Sofia Coppola generally gets criticised for two things: 1)being the product of nepotism; and 2)being a typical 'bourgeois' director. None of those criticisms have anything to do with her being a woman.

[malakaheso]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Interesting. I didn't know that. I haven't really connected (in an 'OMG' type way) with any of the Bergman films I've seen. Regarding Antonioni, it seems that while L'Avventura may have the most fans, feelings on his work is pretty divided. I thought L'Eclisse was an insufferable watch. I liked Blow Up and I know many hate that one.

Really? I was under the impression that Blow Up and The Passenger were his most popular films now, especially Blow Up. I guess L'Avventura is his most canonical work.


Re: Bergman's opinion of Antonioni. He thought Blow Up and La Notte were masterpieces, but he didn't care for his other films.

RE: comparisons between Bergman and Antonioni above, they were completely different film makers. Bergman was more of a traditional dramatist. He was interested in characters and psychodrama. The personal problems that his characters had related to their own childhoods, personal experiences, neurosis', hopes, fears etc. Antonioni was almost the complete opposite. His characters problems generally stemmed from social changes, particularly in relation to physical environments, that they weren't necessarily conscious of, at least not fully.

[scottpcusa]

Next on my reading list is Richard Brody's book, Everything is Cinema. Thanks to whomever it was in this forum who mentioned the book and inspired me to put it on my reading list.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

Art for Clouds of Sils Maria is up:

Gotta admit I was expecting a better cover. I'm not too keen on the floating heads style. It's too bad because Assayas' other films have good covers. The Summer Hours cover is exceptional.

[Helter145]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Yes, the lack of more female-directed films in the Collection is an issue. But I think some people are (understandably) focused on the specific issue of female-directed films that they don't see that it's just one of a number of instances in which Criterion is lacking. We've had this discussion before. Aside from Japan, there's very little coverage of Asian film. There are virtually no films from South America or Africa. The Middle East has little coverage. And so on. I would venture to guess that the Collection is rather short of African-American filmmakers as well.

The real problem is that Criterion is damned no matter what they do. If they don't release more films by women, people complain that they aren't being diverse enough. If they do take up release slots with more female-directed films, there will be complaints from people wondering why they aren't releasing more Kurosawa or Bergman or Lynch or Cronenberg.

I agree that Criterion is too often condemned no matter what they choose to release, as we want them to adjust to our priorities and our notions of what's worthy and what's not, and as Joe Rubin, co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome, puts it: "Every Criterion film is an event"; we wait anxiously as the 15th of every month approaches just for that new group of titles to be announced; yet as much as I would love something like Kurosawa's Ran or like Lynch's The Elephant Man to be announced, I think discovering new films, overlooked ones if you will, from as many parts of the world as possible, is just as great as watching something familiar, and Criterion has shown us it sometimes has place for both, and they also need to find things that are bankable; I think people who've written those articles are only finding problematic the fact that the industry and the movie-buying public, deem more worthy of their time a new release by Cronenberg or any other big director and not willing to explore historically neglected films....

[jmclick]

Originally Posted by Helter145

I agree that Criterion is too often condemned no matter what they choose to release, as we want them to adjust to our priorities and our notions of what's worthy and what's not, and as Joe Rubin, co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome, puts it: "Every Criterion film is an event"; we wait anxiously as the 15th of every month approaches just for that new group of titles to be announced; yet as much as I would love something like Kurosawa's Ran or like Lynch's The Elephant Man to be announced, I think discovering new films, overlooked ones if you will, from as many parts of the world as possible, is just as great as watching something familiar, and Criterion has shown us it sometimes has place for both, and they also need to find things that are bankable; I think people who've written those articles are only finding problematic the fact that the industry and the movie-buying public, deem more worthy of their time a new release by Cronenberg or any other big director and not willing to explore historically neglected films....

Yes, sometimes I have to remind myself that as large as the Criterion Collection may loom in my estimation, they've actually only released less than 400 skus on blu-ray (to date). Considering that there are tens of thousands of films out there, and considering that they are releasing films they license rather than produce, 400 is perhaps too small a sample from which to draw sweeping conclusions about their priorities as a company. I would suppose that if every film in the world were made available to them, that their catalogue might look very different.