The Criterion Collection

[yhzmr]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

I'm not sure what your point is here?

Is it surprising that someone capable of such violence could be portrayed in a somewhat sympathetic light? Is it the fact that Steele wasn't hauled in by the police for putting his hands on her that makes this an apology for domestic violence? The fact that this is not a happily ever after film is the right tone and Ray's instincts are right. Read Great Owl's review for further insight.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by yhzmr

Is it surprising that someone capable of such violence could be portrayed in a somewhat sympathetic light? Is it the fact that Steele wasn't hauled in by the police for putting his hands on her that makes this an apology for domestic violence? The fact that this is not a happily ever after film is the right tone and Ray's instincts are right. Read Great Owl's review for further insight.

Guessing Ray say a lot of himself in that character.

[kylec123]

Originally Posted by John Klein

Because of recommendations on here, I decided to blind buy Y Tu Mama Tambien.

Not sure why it took me till this year to watch this one too, but it's now one of my favorite films of all time.

[SammyJankis]

Just a head's up for you Edward Yang fans craving for some more greatness: the recent restoration for The Terrorizers is available on Prime.

This is a must. The viewing will come somewhat of a surprise if you've only seen the two available titles.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

So, some friends of ours just started getting into classic movies, and we've started a weekly movie club where my wife and I screen (usually) our favourite films. This week we had just received In a Lonely Place and thought we'd screen that, and man, we HATED it. My write up from Letterboxd - contains spoilers:

[Show spoiler]Oh man, this was meant to be such a slam dunk, and we hated it so much!

First of all, yes, it looked beautiful, and the performances were great (especially Gloria Grahame) and the film was expertly made.

And on paper is was SO for us, Bogart, directed by Nicholas Ray, a noir, an adaptation of a Dorothy B Hughes novel.

This movie is, as my wife said, a domestic violence apologist's film. The main character is a violent, drunk who is played by the (usually) charming Humphrey Bogart, who is such a genius we should just accept his beating of everyone who crosses his path as eccentricity?

His agent is a terrified old man who tiptoes around him to avoid being punched - though it's never super clear why. He's been in a dry spell and not bringing in money. He's just such a great guy deep down? Because he sends flowers to the girl that got murdered on his account, and money to the kid he nearly beat to death? He enables his drunk friend's drinking habit?

He goes to his friend's house and talks him into strangling his wife for his entertainment?

The movie ends with him nearly killing his fiance, but then pulling back when the phone rings, and we're meant to feel sorry for their failed relationship because the call came a week too late?

We look down on this piece of shit who beats his girlfriends and he sadly walks away and think 'dang, shame she didn't marry him?' It should have been a celebration of her close call!

This quote from Wikipedia says a lot:

"The film differs from the novel in several substantial ways. For example, in the film Steele is innocent of the murders he's suspected of committing, and is sincere in his desire to be a successful screenwriter; in the novel, he is a violent sociopath who claims to be a crime novel writer in order to sponge off of relatives."

So the writer changed the main character into a poorly done-by genius, who as one of our friends points out is told to 'stick to the book' but is above that. Can't help but think the movie would have been better if it had stuck to the book. And suggests he's just plain unlucky that people suspect him of being a murderer?

This is the second time we've screened a movie at Movie Club without having seen it first, and sadly last time turned out about as well (Nothing Sacred).

Do you feel the same way about Raging Bull?

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Guessing Ray say a lot of himself in that character.

Leave me out of this!

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

Just a head's up for you Edward Yang fans craving for some more greatness: the recent restoration for The Terrorizers is available on Prime.

This is a must. The viewing will come somewhat of a surprise if you've only seen the two available titles.

Love this film. The available Region A blu is worth seeking out. (Edit: Actually according to this site, the release is Region Free. Even better!)

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by scottpcusa

I watched Blind Chance on Hulu last night before the Criterion films expire and I already want to watch it again. It looks like this will be a stock-up-on-more Kieślowski Criterions B&N sale for me.

Seriously...I already want to watch it again!

While you are on Hulu, check out one of his early films Camera Buff, even better than Blind Chance I think, or just check everything by Kieslowski that's on there

[monorail91]

Working on my bi-annual Criterion binge of new titles (my "oh snap! it's 50% off sale time" period). Between Netflix discs and FilmStruck (xoxo) I'm leaning towards:

Yay:

• Blood Simple
• Fox and His Friends
• Only Angels Have Wings

Nay:

• Cronos
• Diabolique
• Sweet Movie

Either Way:

• La Cage aux Folles
• Cat People

Have more on track to see as the sale's still going on. FilmStruck has quite a few titles that were not available on Hulu, so definitely recommend checking out.

[Scottie]

For anyone with Netflix, can you please tell me if Kim Jee-woon's A Bittersweet Life is available?

[ShellOilJunior]

Fanny and Alexander is one of my most treasured blu-rays. I watch the television version every November or December.

If I were to ever produce a top 10 list it would make my final cut easily.

[hYPE]

Anyone have a 20% off coupon for B&N they are not using and willing to help out a friend? Thanks!

[scottpcusa]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

While you are on Hulu, check out one of his early films Camera Buff, even better than Blind Chance I think, or just check everything by Kieslowski that's on there

Yes! Thanks! I have been wanting to watch that one, too. I didn't realize it is on Hulu!

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

Just a head's up for you Edward Yang fans craving for some more greatness: the recent restoration for The Terrorizers is available on Prime.

This is a must. The viewing will come somewhat of a surprise if you've only seen the two available titles.

Thanks for notifying us, Sammy!

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

Love this film. The available Region A blu is worth seeking out. (Edit: Actually according to this site, the release is Region Free. Even better!)

I've come so close to caving on that release. It may just happen after I view it again on Prime tonight.

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by iScottie

For anyone with Netflix, can you please tell me if Kim Jee-woon's A Bittersweet Life is available?

For streaming? No.

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

I've come so close to caving on that release. It may just happen after I view it again on Prime tonight.

YesAsia has been oos forever, but jsdvd has it in stock. Not sure if there are any other good places to order Taiwanese blus from.

[Scottie]

I wonder if we'll ever get domestic releases of As Tears Go By, Days of Being Wild, and A Tale of Two Sisters because I'm tempted to pull the trigger on these South Korean Blu-ray releases.

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

For streaming? No.

Thanks for the response. Also, thanks for posting the information regarding The Terrorizers because I'm more than likely going to watch it tonight.

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I wonder if we'll ever get domestic releases of As Tears Go By, Days of Being Wild, and A Tale of Two Sisters because I'm tempted to pull the trigger on these South Korean Blu-ray releases.



Thanks for the response. Also, thanks for posting the information regarding The Terrorizers because I'm more than likely going to watch it tonight.

Glad to hear. Looking forward to your thoughts

[Purplenoon]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

So, some friends of ours just started getting into classic movies, and we've started a weekly movie club where my wife and I screen (usually) our favourite films. This week we had just received In a Lonely Place and thought we'd screen that, and man, we HATED it. My write up from Letterboxd - contains spoilers:

[Show spoiler]Oh man, this was meant to be such a slam dunk, and we hated it so much!

First of all, yes, it looked beautiful, and the performances were great (especially Gloria Grahame) and the film was expertly made.

And on paper is was SO for us, Bogart, directed by Nicholas Ray, a noir, an adaptation of a Dorothy B Hughes novel.

This movie is, as my wife said, a domestic violence apologist's film. The main character is a violent, drunk who is played by the (usually) charming Humphrey Bogart, who is such a genius we should just accept his beating of everyone who crosses his path as eccentricity?

His agent is a terrified old man who tiptoes around him to avoid being punched - though it's never super clear why. He's been in a dry spell and not bringing in money. He's just such a great guy deep down? Because he sends flowers to the girl that got murdered on his account, and money to the kid he nearly beat to death? He enables his drunk friend's drinking habit?

He goes to his friend's house and talks him into strangling his wife for his entertainment?

The movie ends with him nearly killing his fiance, but then pulling back when the phone rings, and we're meant to feel sorry for their failed relationship because the call came a week too late?

We look down on this piece of shit who beats his girlfriends and he sadly walks away and think 'dang, shame she didn't marry him?' It should have been a celebration of her close call!

This quote from Wikipedia says a lot:

"The film differs from the novel in several substantial ways. For example, in the film Steele is innocent of the murders he's suspected of committing, and is sincere in his desire to be a successful screenwriter; in the novel, he is a violent sociopath who claims to be a crime novel writer in order to sponge off of relatives."

So the writer changed the main character into a poorly done-by genius, who as one of our friends points out is told to 'stick to the book' but is above that. Can't help but think the movie would have been better if it had stuck to the book. And suggests he's just plain unlucky that people suspect him of being a murderer?

This is the second time we've screened a movie at Movie Club without having seen it first, and sadly last time turned out about as well (Nothing Sacred).

I really liked the novel, but not the movie: a big disappointment.