The Criterion Collection

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jw007

Hey, I'm sure someone has posted this link already but I just noticed that Mulholland Dr. was voted #1 film of the 21st century!

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/201...greatest-films

In the top 10 we also have Criterion releases In the Mood for Love (#2), Boyhood (#5) and Yi Yi (#8)! Also, interestingly enough, Inside Llewyn Davis is voted at #11.

This list was discussed in, of all places, a running forum that I also frequent.

I've only seen 46 of the above films on the list. My personal favorites from the above 100 are...

No Country for Old Men
Lost in Translation
Caché
The Lives of Others
Under the Skin

My personal favorite movie of the 21st century so far is still Casino Royale (2006), but I get why it wouldn't appear on such a list.

I really like Mulholland Drive, although I don't obsess over it like a lot of folks do. It's a film that gets better with each viewing.

[mja345]

#5 is way too high for "Boyhood" IMO. A few glaring omissions: "Y tu Mama Tambien", "Downfall", "Sideways", "Road to Perdition", "The Hunt".

[ShellOilJunior]

51. Inception (Christopher Nolan, 2010)

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This list was discussed in, of all places, a running forum that I also frequent.

I've only seen 46 of the above films on the list. My personal favorites from the above 100 are...

No Country for Old Men
Lost in Translation
Caché
The Lives of Others
Under the Skin

My personal favorite movie of the 21st century so far is still Casino Royale (2006), but I get why it wouldn't appear on such a list.

I really like Mulholland Drive, although I don't obsess over it like a lot of folks do. It's a film that gets better with each viewing.

So this isn't the only forum you spend time with is it Mr. Owl?

How many nights Owl?

How many nights I sat around here waiting for you, wondering where you were...assuming you were still at the office working late.

And you were with them.

Doing god knows what.

...you BASTARD.

...I trusted you.

[Show spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMOGaugKpzs

[theater dreamer]

The Pianist #90
The Wolf of Wall Street #78
Spring Breakers #74

What the actual ....? The Wolf of Wall Street isn't half the movie The Pianist is (not even close), and....Spring Breakers?

Seriously?

I watched about 25 minutes of this film last week on (I think) Showtime, and I had to change it. I literally felt my IQ dropping. People try to make it out to be some kind of brilliant social commentary-it's not. It's just a poorly made film that tried desperately to be something deep, and failed miserably.

[MeMynonsense]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Totally agree with you dude, it's a Top Tenner.

[SammyJankis]

Something something, this film film is too low, where is this film, something something.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

So this isn't the only forum you spend time with is it Mr. Owl?

How many nights Owl?

How many nights I sat around here waiting for you, wondering where you were...assuming you were still at the office working late.

And you were with them.

Doing god knows what.

...you BASTARD.

...I trusted you.

I'm sorry I did it, but they made me feel special.

Actually, I'm on the running forum for maybe 10 minutes a day, tops, while I'm on this forum... Well, I won't tell y'all what y'all already know.

I do lurk at Home Theater Forum as well, but I've never signed up for that site, and they seem to be doing just fine without me around. I mainly like to read the reviews there.

[italy12]

Quick question regarding the October releases...

The Tree of Wooden Clogs used to have a spine # and now it does not. It is still listed in their Coming Soon page as a 10/25 release, but with no spine. They shifted the spines of the films after it so there is no gap.

Anyone know anything regarding this change, and why?

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I didn't know this film was so disliked. I thought it was fine and I walked out of the theater with the idea that I wanted to see it again to understand it better. I never did revisit it and that's ok by me. Just didn't realize that it was the butt of a joke.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I didn't know this film was so disliked. I thought it was fine and I walked out of the theater with the idea that I wanted to see it again to understand it better. I never did revisit it and that's ok by me. Just didn't realize that it was the butt of a joke.

Inception is not a bad movie on its own terms, but, when I saw it at the theater, it just made me want to watch On Her Majesty's Secret Service again.

[Knaldskalle]

To me, the main problem with Nolan's movies is that they get totally over-hyped. They're not bad, but each and every one of them get proclaimed to be masterpieces. I've seen people seriously suggesting that The Dark Knight was the best movie ever made. Inception was supposed to be this clever multi-layered film (it just manages to make dumb people feel smart) and Interstellar was promoted as being scientifically accurate (it isn't and it doesn't even attempt to explain the temporal paradox it ultimately relies on).

Inception is probably the one that bugs me the most because the premise (the ability to "invade" dreams) could've made for one fantastic movie yet the whole thing is reduced to a slow motion shootout. For an idea of what can be done with the concept, go watch Satoshi Kon's "Paprika" and then imagine how that could've looked as a live action movie with some good CGI.

[jw007]

I actually had an "Inception-style" dream a few nights ago when in my dream I remember telling someone that I dreamed of this poetry that I wrote but don't remember the dream in my dream.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Knaldskalle

Inception is probably the one that bugs me the most because the premise (the ability to "invade" dreams) could've made for one fantastic movie yet the whole thing is reduced to a slow motion shootout. For an idea of what can be done with the concept, go watch Satoshi Kon's "Paprika" and then imagine how that could've looked as a live action movie with some good CGI.

EXACTLY my thoughts when I saw the film. I'd done a review on my blog, just quoting from that for anyone interested:

Alright now. First, let's get the praise out of the way. Inception is a good way to pass a couple of your movie-watching hours, engaging enough as a big budget heist thriller with spadefuls of visual chutzpah. The production design and visual trickery are breathtaking at times and Hans Zimmer's score rocks. In terms of thrilling large masses of moviegoers and making tons of money the film has succeeded handsomely, while still appearing more thoughtful than its box-office competitors.

But seriously, a speculative or imaginative look at dream-scapes it is not. For that stuff, see any of Satoshi Kon's films (Paprika, Millennium Actress, Perfect Blue), which do a far better job of representing the disorientation and emotional impact of being caught in a dream world. If in fact I may say so, Inception is as anti-dream as it gets. What is it that makes our dreams special? It is that they play as our own 3D hyper-real movie loops, the emphasis being on “our own”, since individuality is what makes them special. They are designed by our mind, taking unpredictably from the flotsam of our memories, feelings and ideas. Sure, elements and themes can be common across the dreams of a population but while we are in them we see a personalized vision, which is what gives them emotional heft. The problem with the bulk of Inception's dreamscapes is that they're quite impersonal, and don't, as far as I recall, seem to reflect the personalities of any of the characters taking part in them. The “shared dream” is just a flashy theme park ride version of a heist caper, more Jeffrey Archer than Philip K Dick.

To fit an exploration of the human mind to the confines of the action thriller format was never going to be easy. Nolan's approach to this problem is to reduce the mind in question to that of an utter idiot. Cillian Murphy's character, the main victim, follows instructions and feels what he is told to. If he has any personality, we don't see it. There could have been some real fun to be had if his own sub-conscious (or that of ANY of the several players in the scheme) had flung in some genuine curve-balls to the dream-heist scheme. But noooo, his sub-conscious defenses (a skill of very dubious utility taught by specialists as a means of protecting your mind's secrets from dream-burglars) are a bunch of constantly spawning generic gun-toting goons, little more than speed-bumps for the “dream team”. Frankly that's a concept they should have left for the video-game tie-up.

Since in Hollywood thrillers, there must be a countdown to something or the other, Inception has this conceit where every dream (or dream within a dream) has a constant and measurable pace. So multi-tier dream constructs fabricated like Russian Matryoshka dolls can be synchronized to a single moment of awakening which, not surprisingly, reflects a typical blockbuster film climax (In this case, more than one). But how does it relate to the other plot point of this film, Cobb's wife? Without going too deeply into spoiler territory, the film suggests that they are undertaking multi-tiered dreams that at a certain level span decades. Given the kind of convoluted rules this process involves in the central heist plot, it hardly seems the stuff of husband-wife fun. Without these silly rules, the relationship aspect with the shared dream thingy would have in itself made for a great smaller budget movie. Sorry if I appear too harsh, but here it's just another MacGuffin to give our hero some guilt trip he must overcome by the film's end. Inception is not a cluster**** of stupidity as some of its peers in the summer blockbuster category, but it's an action film with some clever duct tape to hold the explosions and CG imagery together than one with any serious speculative leanings, and you're likely to remember the wonders of its folding buildings and staircases for longer than the details of its story and characters.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This list was discussed in, of all places, a running forum that I also frequent.

I've only seen 46 of the above films on the list. My personal favorites from the above 100 are...

No Country for Old Men
Lost in Translation
Caché
The Lives of Others
Under the Skin

My personal favorite movie of the 21st century so far is still Casino Royale (2006), but I get why it wouldn't appear on such a list.

I really like Mulholland Drive, although I don't obsess over it like a lot of folks do. It's a film that gets better with each viewing.

Wow, Owl, I can't believe this, but....

I saw 47 films out of that list... just topping your 46!

I wonder if my list of watched films are nearly identical to yours?

Lost in Translation (#22) is one of my favorite 21st century films however.

But coming in at #26, its amazing that the 25th Hour has yet to be given its own stand-alone blu-ray release! This title would be amazing in the Criterion Collection. It's one very powerful film.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by jw007

Wow, Owl, I can't believe this, but....

I saw 47 films out of that list... just topping your 46!

I wonder if my list of watched films are nearly identical to yours?

Lost in Translation (#22) is one of my favorite 21st century films however.

But coming in at #26, its amazing that the 25th Hour has yet to be given its own stand-alone blu-ray release! This title would be amazing in the Criterion Collection. It's one very powerful film.

..and I'm even more shocked because I've seen 49.

[Fabs]

Originally Posted by jw007

Hey, I'm sure someone has posted this link already but I just noticed that Mulholland Dr. was voted #1 film of the 21st century!

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/201...greatest-films

In the top 10 we also have Criterion releases In the Mood for Love (#2), Boyhood (#5) and Yi Yi (#8)! Also, interestingly enough, Inside Llewyn Davis is voted at #11.

It's a huge omission not to have a single film by Hirokazu Koreeda.

[repulsed]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

..and I'm even more shocked because I've seen 49.

I win...
at having no life [emoji3]

I've seen 61
and another 10 or so I either own
or should have seen by now
I'm pretty good at putting off films for way longer than I want to

[Knaldskalle]

Originally Posted by repulsed

I win...
at having no life [emoji3]

I've seen 61
and another 10 or so I either own
or should have seen by now
I'm pretty good at putting off films for way longer than I want to

69/102. Which frankly surprises me quite a bit, since I'm not really into contemporary movies.

Life? Yeah, I've heard of it.

[senseabove]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

..and I'm even more shocked because I've seen 49.

I'm a bit surprised that I've seen 59! Given, some of them were ages ago. There are another 11 that are on my shortlist of movies to watch soon, a handful more on the "I suppose I should watch these at some point..." longlist, and the rest I either don't know, didn't know they were so highly regarded, or I guess will be reconsidering their absence from that longlist.