The Criterion Collection

[mja345]

The old DVD of

[Show spoiler]One Eyed Jacks

looks like a VHS rip. It's absolutely awful. It's a great film, but seeing a 4K restoration will really give it a new life.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by tenia

Z.
Freaking Z.

I want this one badly.

[jshaide]

Can't bring myself to look, but I'm glad to see so much excitement.

I did expect, and deduce, about

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf and Cub

, but the other four I really have no idea what to expect.


EDIT: Ach, I saw the leak for

[Show spoiler]One-Eyed Jacks

on another page. But the OTHER three. . .! I plan on seeing this one in theaters in the next couple of weeks.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

You only mentioned "pulpy samurai films", now you're just lumping popular titles into your original argument. Again, that's business. I doubt if you ran the company you'd turn down opportunities to release those popular titles. I'm pretty sure media sales are not as strong as they used to be, which is why we are seeing more popular titles, and perhaps why Criterion has branched out to the UK as a new source of revenue.

If they could get by on just the most niche of titles, then fine, but if it takes them selling a a few thousand copies of Dr Strangelove, for them to release more niche stuff then we should all be embracing them. We know Criterion has Stalker, and I believe Almodovar said a lot (if not all) of his films are getting a Criterion release, so just be patient and I'm sure your particular wishes will be answered soon enough

I agree with and like your second paragraph here.

the first sentence... not so much. not worth getting upset about, but I wish people wouldn't read two sentences strung together and make "definitive" conclusions w/o giving me or anyone else a chance to elaborate on an opinion. I'm not looking forward to the

[Show spoiler]PTA

film either, if that makes you samurai fans feel a little better.

[Ray Jackson]

Ladies and gentlemen...I must regret to inform you...that Monsieur Raymund Jackson...will be unable...to POST TODAY!

...nor indeed any other day.

[ShellOilJunior]

Maybe Criterion will now post a storage room video with

[Show spoiler]Adam Sandler

. I'd like to see his selections. You never know with some people. I think Michael Cera had picked Close-Up.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Maybe Criterion will now post a storage room video with

[Show spoiler]Adam Sandler

. I'd like to see his selections. You never know with some people. I think Michael Cera had picked Close-Up.

[Show spoiler]Sandler

may shed some tears about his transformation into a woman for

[Show spoiler]Jack and Jill

a la Dustin Hoffman if he picks up "Tootsie" in the closet.

[Show spoiler]The Sand Man

showed that level of commitment to the role.

[zombivish]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

well regarded? are Lady Snowblood or

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf & Cub

on the S&S or the TSPDT top 1000? not a sarcastic retort. I honestly don't know. The latter has a tomatometer score of 71%. from what I've read, I don't know that the latter is inventive or influential either. LS influenced Tarantino, right? I'm probably in the minority in that I thought the first Kill Bill was a bore while the second was quite good.

I should have said well regarded in genre circles perhaps?
Still, I'd say

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf & Cub

falls under the "important classic and contemporary films" as much as any number of other films currently in the collection.
I think there's room for both more austere films and those more "pulpy" titles.

As for the filmmaking - I'd argue there's a of really neat things going on in these films. There are some great visual flourishes - not all arterial blood sprays (which isn't to say those aren't fantastic!)
LS &

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf & Cub

were both influences on Kill Bill, but so were at least a half dozen other chambara and kung-fu flicks. Whether or not QT's films were a bore is hardly a reflection on the originals.

I think I agree with you in my dislike for larger titles (like

[Show spoiler] Punch Drunk Love

) in the collection, but again, I understand the cost benefit of that.

Is it really about this being a cash grab so much as the addition of titles that aren't to your specific taste?
That's cool if it is, each to their own and all that.

[Arch Stanton]

Incredible month. Delighted with Criterion this year!

[Show spoiler]Knew One Eyed Jacks was coming but didn't think it would be via Criterion, and also obviously Punch-Drunk which I've been dreaming about owning for years now

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Ladies and gentlemen...I must regret to inform you...that Monsieur Raymund Jackson...will be unable...to POST TODAY!

...nor indeed any other day.

I think he already posted today. I might even be quoting him right now.

[AndersonVision]

That's what I get for not checking my tabs. Totally looking forward to today's announcements. Especially on the rumored PTA inclusion.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by zombivish

I should have said well regarded in genre circles perhaps?
Still, I'd say

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf & Cub

falls under the "important classic and contemporary films" as much as any number of other films currently in the collection.
I think there's room for both more austere films and those more "pulpy" titles.

As for the filmmaking - I'd argue there's a of really neat things going on in these films. There are some great visual flourishes - not all arterial blood sprays (which isn't to say those aren't fantastic!)
LS &

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf & Cub

were both influences on Kill Bill, but so were at least a half dozen other chambara and kung-fu flicks. Whether or not QT's films were a bore is hardly a reflection on the originals.

I think I agree with you in my dislike for larger titles (like

[Show spoiler] Punch Drunk Love

) in the collection, but again, I understand the cost benefit of that.

Is it really about this being a cash grab so much as the addition of titles that aren't to your specific taste?
That's cool if it is, each to their own and all that.

okay. well, it is good to get a little info on these, so thanks.

I had originally thought A Touch of Zen fell into this category, but from what I understand it is quite artful, so I'd like to see it if I get a chance.

as to your last sentence... both I guess are true. I just don't fancy many of these popular title releases - even if I like the film. a "happy" release day is when I meet all or most of the titles with puzzled curiosity only to figure out some time later that a film has found its way into my "must see" list.

[Arch Stanton]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

very well.

have fun.

but you guys have proven my point about CC being in a money grab phase.

I'm not massive on samurai films either outside of Kurosawa but I really don't see how they constitute money grabbing releases. The Criterion money grabbers are the pointless Wes Anderson ones, not fairly obscure Asian cinema films with a more limited appeal.

[jbieste]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Ladies and gentlemen...I must regret to inform you...that Monsieur Raymund Jackson...will be unable...to POST TODAY!

...nor indeed any other day.

Wow, you used your phone call to let us know you might be 'missing'. I am impressed.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

I'm not massive on samurai films either outside of Kurosawa but I really don't see how they constitute money grabbing releases. The Criterion money grabbers are the pointless Wes Anderson ones, not fairly obscure Asian cinema films with a more limited appeal.

It's interesting to see that different people have different opinions on what Criterion releases are "worthy" and which ones are "money grabs".

[zombivish]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

... I had originally thought A Touch of Zen fell into this category, but from what I understand it is quite artful, so I'd like to see it if I get a chance.

A Touch of Zen (a martial arts film, yes, a samurai, or chambara, flick, no) is simply wonderful imo.
Based purely on your recent posts i'd say give it a spin when you can.
Yes, there's lots of (really great) sword play, but there's a lot of heady philosophical stuff there too. From a filmmaking stand point there's some really fantastic work. (Check out some of David Bordwell's writing on the film - he covers it far better than i could https://www.criterion.com/current/po...cheming-flying http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/20...es-a-jump-cut/ )

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

...a "happy" release day is when I meet all or most of the titles with puzzled curiosity only to figure out some time later that a film has found its way into my "must see" list.

These are my favourites too. Granted for me the unknown titles are more often explored via a dvd borrowed from the library before ponying up for the blu (new baby = tighter movie budget)

[mja345]

The way I look at it is that everyone has specific genres, or even sub-genres, that get them more excited than others. Some love film noir, some love samurai films, some love Italian neo-realism, some love horror, some love New Hollywood-era films, some love Westerns, some love French New Wave. Hell, some people probably get all hot and bothered about Wes Anderson films receiving CC treatment. Nobody is excited about every release from any label, whether it's Criterion, Arrow, Twilight Time, Kino, and on down the line.

[Arch Stanton]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

It's interesting to see that different people have different opinions on what Criterion releases are "worthy" and which ones are "money grabs".

Well not really, you can even be fairly objective about this sort of thing.

Moonrise Kingdom/Fantastic Mr Fox/inevitably Grand Budapest Hotel already have Blu Ray releases and will never look better. You get extras I guess but there are obviously more deserving films. Inside Llewyn Davis is another example. Wes Anderson and the Coen bros are big, trendy names in modern cinema and occupy that sweet spot of just above mainstream and just below arthouse - releases that will always make them big sellers.

Whereas many of the samurai films for instance have no previous release or representation at all. I don't even like the samurai genre that much but they're clearly good candidates for Criterion.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

Well not really, you can even be fairly objective about this sort of thing.

Moonrise Kingdom/Fantastic Mr Fox/inevitably Grand Budapest Hotel already have Blu Ray releases and will never look better. You get extras I guess but there are obviously more deserving films. Inside Llewyn Davis is another example. Wes Anderson and the Coen bros are big, trendy names in modern cinema and occupy that sweet spot of just above mainstream and just below arthouse - releases that will always make them big sellers.

Whereas many of the samurai films for instance have no previous release or representation at all. I don't even like the samurai genre that much but they're clearly good candidates for Criterion.

I suppose, but I think if I was going for a money grab, I wouldn't release a $40 edition of a film that is already readily available on blu for $5-$7.

Wouldn't a money grab be a super popular film that *doesn't* already have a cheap available release? Not to mention, doesn't money grab insinuate that Criterion doesn't have genuine interest in the films themselves, just their profit potential? It always seemed to me that Criterion genuinely loves WA's films.

Maybe we need to define "money grab".

[Arch Stanton]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

I suppose, but I think if I was going for a money grab, I wouldn't release a $40 edition of a film that is already readily available on blu for $5-$7.

Wouldn't a money grab be a super popular film that *doesn't* already have a cheap available release? Not to mention, doesn't money grab insinuate that Criterion doesn't have genuine interest in the films themselves, just their profit potential? It always seemed to me that Criterion genuinely loves WA's films.

Maybe we need to define "money grab".

Well, there's a kind of prestige associated with the Criterion label that entices people to double dipping on films like Moonrise Kingdom. I'm not convinced people buy them purely to get these heralded extras. If you check reddit you'll see examples of this.

I don't really mind that much. They have to make money and bank on certain releases. Just a bit strange for the OP to call samurai films moneygrabbers.