The Criterion Collection

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Juiceboxjerry

I agree with the point of what you're saying, which is that it is sad that certain director's have to fall back on the same tricks to try and manipulate an audience's emotion.

But I do think some movies can use those tricks, and still make a good film though. I think Shawshank is an example of that. Even though it might be simplistic in the way it gets it's story and message across, it's still very well done imo.

Whereas, I totally agree with you on something like Saving Private Ryan. That's an example of a director (Spielberg) using those tricks in a heavy handed way, for the sole purpose of trying to get a certain reaction from the audience (CRY NOW!). I recently watched it again for the new Blu release, and I find that I like it less and less with each subsequent viewing.

That's fair. Shawshank isn't a bad movie to watch. The whole thing was according to some, it's the best film ever, which I disagree with. It's simplistic story telling is why I don't LOVE the film. And that's cool, it's just my opinion.

I hate keep bringing up Spielberg, with all of the fans of his here, but you hit on the points of why his films are just hard to actually sit through MORE THAN ONCE, telling yourself it's one of my favs. I own Spielberg movies. They just collect dust though.

[jimonee78]

I'm eagerly anticipating the package pics for "Breathless". It'll probably be in the clear case but digi would be nice.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

PRE-ORDERS:

America Lost and Found: The BBS Story:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Ameri...Blu-ray/14981/

Pro-B

Nice, only $87.49.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by jimonee78

I'm eagerly anticipating the package pics for "Breathless". It'll probably be in the clear case but digi would be nice.

I'll be cool either way. I got the dvd, so I won't be left hanging if the blu doesn't have the awesome digi style. The packaging pics should be next up I believe. So in week now.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by 42041

I think that's a gross oversimplification of how such movies work. Popular filmmakers of a lesser caliber (Michael Bay comes to mind) employ the same tools to very weak effect, so clearly there's a lot more to making an effective crowd pleaser than that. I suspect many of the filmmakers that film snobs revere do not possess that skillset either.

Yes, Spielberg has the SKILLSET to make money off of his mastering of manipulating emotions and Bay can't (so instead Bay cast what he thinks are "hot" girls and blows crap up to get guys of all ages to buy tickets). What's your point again? I will sit here and say Spielberg knows what he is doing, or he wouldn't be the most popular director ever. Do I like what he does? No. I don't understand what your getting at, also with your film snob comment.

Spielberg is smarter than Godard, if you want to talk about it in a business way. Why would Godard make movies for himself when you can be rich making movies? That's dumb if your talking business. Well Spielberg plays it safe, for $. Godard grew up with $, so he can do whatever he wants. Way that life is. Hence the last projects by these 2. Indiana Jones 4 vs a video camera film called Film Socialisme. One was making a film for money, while the other made one for himself. Sounds like one was playing it safe, rehashing ideas.

But this is why I don't like it. Spielberg is on top of the world. Rich. Why still be safe and not do what you want? To get greedy. That is my dislike.

Dennis Hopper made Easy Rider for Peter Fonda. What did he do after that? Made something he wanted, The Last Movie, didn't play it safe at all, and now is called "ahead of it's time". Didn't make $ though, and pretty much got booted from Hollywood at that time.

Art VS Business!

That is also why you see Hollywood's sequels and remakes rising. They don't want to shell out money for something they are not sure on. Keeping it safe. Hollywood=Business, not art. So why should I like a film made for money? All of these Kick-Ass and Toy Story 3 films are made for money, not you, but your money. Now Hollywood does let guys like Tarantino and Nolan loose because they have proven they can make the studio money just by the director's name attached to something. But screw you if your a new director with a new idea. They don't want another Hopper's Last Movie. They want Saw 8 or 9 or whatever number they are on.

Goodnight everyone. Will see the pages of responses in the morning.

[bugsy_pal]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Spielberg is smarter than Godard, if you want to talk about it in a business way. Why would Godard make movies for himself when you can be rich making movies? That's dumb if your talking business. Well Spielberg plays it safe, for $. Godard grew up with $, so he can do whatever he wants. Way that life is. Hence the last projects by these 2. Indiana Jones 4 vs a video camera film called Film Socialisme. One was making a film for money, while the other made one for himself. Sounds like one was playing it safe, rehashing ideas.

But this is why I don't like it. Spielberg is on top of the world. Rich. Why still be safe and not do what you want? To get greedy. That is my dislike.

Seems like we're just fodder for your rants... I'll just say that, Spielberg, despite his sentimentality and corniness, has created some unique films, many of which try to create a childlike sense of wonder... at life, the universe... (Close Encounters was a perfect film for Truffaut to play that role in). I've never much liked E.T. as a movie, but when my kids watch it, I always get a big lump in my throat when those kids take to the air on their bicycles... why? I dunno, but who wouldn't like to fly? Hell, I even cried during one bit of "Always", and that's a real clunker

I don't want to get into a defense of Spielberg - I just want to say... perhaps consider his film output, rather than bagging him for making money.

To keep it on Criterion... didn't they release Close Encounters on laserdisc? BTW, if you like science fiction, you owe it to yourself to see Close Encounters on bluray.

[kndy]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

But this is why I don't like it. Spielberg is on top of the world. Rich. Why still be safe and not do what you want? To get greedy. That is my dislike.

I actually had this discussion in regards to Ridley Scott's recent comments. And I know some people were alarmed by his comments but I wasn't.

For one, with a lot of the film studios hurting and many worried about the state of movies via the cinema, digital downloads, piracy, formats, etc. many of them want to depend on directors such as Spielberg, Ridley Scott, Roland Emmerich, Michael Bay, etc. to make money for the studio.

These men create expensive films which typically make a ton of money and any deviation can be worrisome for them.

As for Jean-Luc Godard, I admire him as a filmmaker but I do not admire him as a businessman. He burned bridges with his producers, his film partners and even his filmmaking friends because he kept asking for money from the directors, the talents, friends and family but his way of doing it was obtrusive and of course it was one of the reasons why his friendship with Truffaut, Jean-Pierre Gorin, Pierre Braunberger had ended.

It's also important to note that films that we love and appreciate for their artistic style were not appreciated by the mass audiences. We always hear how Murnau's "Sunshine", Lang's "Metropolis", D.W. Griffith's "Intolerance", Tati's "Playtime" and the list goes and on and on of how these films were not successful but yet as much as we look back them on today as remarkable achievement, they were not seen that way back then and we saw the ramifications. D.W. Griffith's studio went bankrupt, Jacques Tati was financially crippled and it's a tough business where unfortunately the studios care more for blockbuster hits. No matter if "Transformers 2", "G.I. Joe - The Rise of Cobra" or even "The Last Airbender" were panned by critics, they made a lot of money and there is no doubt we are going to see continued sequels because they make money. And it's part of American culture that mainstream America prefers these movies and why people who follow foreign films tend to question American's taste in films.

But I definitely understand what you are getting at. You are one of many cinema fans who have a disdain towards the Hollywood model. Films created for entertainment and also to make big money.

But at the same time, I feel we are fortunate because we have access to a lot of fantastic films from other countries, the ability to watch fantastic films that many others will probably not want to see. But most importantly, as I am a member of other website forums that usually consist of hardcore film snobs, it's good to come and visit this thread because I don't have to read the usual "Hollywood films sucks", "mainstream films sucks" and just know that although a Criterion Collection thread, it's not too serious. It's not overly critical, we are not talking about which filmmaker utilizes marxist ideas or a Brechtian style, no one cares about if you read Trilling, Nabokov, Chabon, Austen... it's a laid back thread where I know its not populated by cineaste.

As for the big films and artistic films, this is something that will continually be debated for Ad Infinitum. Some of us may be aesthete that can find enjoyment in the Andy Warhol screen tests or Cinématon but go outside of this thread and look what other people are excited about and it is what it is. They may not be cineaste but they are passionate about movies.

I'm more happy that through forums like this Criterion Collection thread, I am reading more and more from people who were typically more of the type to purchase mainstream films but now are giving Criterion Collection films a chance and furthering their knowledge of film and stepping outside of what they are typically used to and enjoying it.

And I am so tired and at this point of typing this message...that I have no idea what I'm typing about now and at this late hour I may have went into several tangents. I should have been a bit more laconic but you get the point...I hope.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Oh crap......

ccfixx
rkish
kndy
Beta Man
P@t_Mtl
BillyJack
ChadFL
Dotpattern
herzog4life
jcs913
Juiceboxjerry
Knapsack
Monolithium
ShellOilJunior
Volume11
zedd_117

someone doesn't respect me and doesn't listen to any words I say because I have strong opinions on something that shouldn't of even been talked about on this thread. OH NO! I'm a snob. A Rob Zombie movie loving film snob.

What, I watch Godard movies and not Spielberg movies? How anti-american of me. FILM SNOB! What, I don't like generic emotions pushed onto me while watching a movie? FILM SNOB! What, I don't agree with IMDB ranking sytem? FILM SNOB! What, I think it's a joke? FILM SNOB! It's my fault that I branch out rather than watching the same **** all the time? FILM SNOB! I must like Will Smith movies, right? NO. What? FILM SNOB!

Too bad I never went to film school. They would really have something to grab onto with this Film Snob stuff, huh?

Hey! I sort of agree with you on movie listing, they really have no meaning. Ok, I admit I am guilty of taking part in some list at time here mostly for fun but at the end of it all, list of movies mean nothing. I think the biggest trouble on these forums and with list on the Internet is "hyped". Where I agree with you is where a lot of people just got from movie to movie calling them "the greatest movie of all time" and then saying they will kill themselves if it doesn't win an Oscar It goes from The Dark Knight, to Avatar to now Inception. I don't truly mind that they enjoy the movies so much but I find funny the reaction some of them have over them. I suppose they are allowed to have these reaction, who am I to judge since I enjoy Star Wars and even worst I like the prequels

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Not on this one...... Netflix has me watching films I otherwise would never see, and "Kick Ass" was one of them......

Norbit is a guilty pleasure at times......
I like "turn your brain off" Michael Bay stuff....... (some of it)
Iron Man is better than The Dark Knight by a mile......

But "Kick Ass" is painful to watch...... not one good actor, nor character I can make myself like........ it was a tough one.... I wanted it to get better, but it just kept getting worse.

EDIT:

Thought I streamed this.... but I actually got the disc in the mail on this one.

I will see Kick Ass at one point. It's not a movie I will go see in theaters that is for sure but will see as a rental at one point or at least on my local movie channel. I do not go a lot to theaters anymore, just too expensive. The 3D option which is now more and more forced on me is also a turn off for me. Theaters this summer offer only 3D options for movies and as such did not go see them. I can understand why people would enjoy 3D but I have no need for it, so if they will offer only 3D, they will lose me as a customer.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by s00perd00per

Oh man, I wonder if one day there'll be a movie about internet forum drama.

They are making Battleship The Movie and a movie about Facebook, so why not that as well

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Juiceboxjerry

I recently watched it again for the new Blu release, and I find that I like it less and less with each subsequent viewing.

Funny you said that. I have notice for me that a lot of movies done in the last 15 to 20 years feel this way to me. I tought maybe I was alone in my weird ways on that one. I loved them as they came out and kept on seeing them from time to time but notice that with time passing more and more of them were losing me. I am not sure why that is but it really doesn't happen for movies that are pre 1990. Too much CGI that was cool at first viewing and then as the "cool" factor wear's off I start to see that the story is weak and it's truly not that good? I can't really say but I have been getting this feeling more and more in the last five years.

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by kndy

I actually had this discussion in regards to Ridley Scott's recent comments. And I know some people were alarmed by his comments but I wasn't.

It doesn't surprise me that Scott considers movies as business rather than art.

Remember what David Mamet said:

I like mass entertainment. I've written mass entertainment. But it's the opposite of art because the job of mass entertainment is to cajole, seduce and flatter consumers to let them know that what they thought was right is right, and that their tastes and their immediate gratification are of the utmost concern of the purveyor. The job of the artist, on the other hand, is to say, 'Wait a second, to the contrary, everything that we have thought is wrong. Let's reexamine it.'

Ridley Scott makes mass entertainment. Yeah, many of their movies are really good (I'm a huge Alien fan), but they don't offer much beyond the surface. What you see is what you get.

He did make art once, almost despite himself. The movie, of course, is Blade Runner. It's still baffling that he managed to make such a multi-layered movie (and not only aesthetically, but also thematically).

(IMO of course.)

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

PRE-ORDERS:

America Lost and Found: The BBS Story:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Ameri...Blu-ray/14981/

Modern Times:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Moder...Blu-ray/14982/

Antichrist:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Antic...Blu-ray/11304/

Pro-B

Gonna jump before the inevitable price increase.....

Thanks for the heads-up Pro-B

[bytor]

Originally Posted by Grubert

He did make art once, almost despite himself. The movie, of course, is Blade Runner. It's still baffling that he managed to make such a multi-layered movie (and not only aesthetically, but also thematically).

(IMO of course.)

I agree, I think Blade Runner is his best. His comment is alarming to me though because it's in line with what's happening to his movies. I haven't seen Robin Hood yet (hopes aren't too high), but the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven seems to be his last great movie.

I thought American Gangster was horribly bland and added nothing new to the genre. Body of Lies was solid but not real memorable. And now with his only caring about money out in the open, what's next, PG-13 Alien Prequels?

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Gonna jump before the inevitable price increase.....

Thanks for the heads-up Pro-B

Yeah, the only weird one is the pricing for "Antichrist" because it's been up for pre-order quite a while now, ya know? I locked it in at the $27.99 price long ago, though. I guess I can get rid of my Region B Artificial Eye release now. Anyone... anyone?

Either way, we'll keep the pre-orders for now until we hear of another sale.

CC

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

Yeah, the only weird one is the pricing for "Antichrist" because it's been up for pre-order quite a while now, ya know? I locked it in at the $27.99 price long ago, though. I guess I can get rid of my Region B Artificial Eye release now. Anyone... anyone?

Either way, we'll keep the pre-orders for now until we hear of another sale.

CC

Amazon sent me an email saying there was now a release date for it, etc. etc..... I had locked it in a long time ago too...... I'm going to keep an eye on the DeedDiscount sale, and see if they include any others in that sale........

Amazon had been doing random Criterion price-drops for a day or two here and there....... but they haven't dropped anything (other than Benny Buttons) below 30% off in a long time

[Beta Man]

Antichrist is pretty cheap to import right now...... and Pro-B gave it a solid review (4/5 for PQ and AQ)

I'll hold onto my Criterion Pre-order still..... but are the extras the same?

[rkish]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Did you watch the film on mute?

If you stream the film on NetFlix, there is no music.

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Antichrist is pretty cheap to import right now...... and Pro-B gave it a solid review (4/5 for PQ and AQ)

I'll hold onto my Criterion Pre-order still..... but are the extras the same?

Antichrist UK is region B and 1080i50.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by Grubert

Antichrist UK is region B and 1080i50.

Which is no problem if you have a region-free player like I do.

CC