The Criterion Collection

[mja345]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

I tracked down the article over my lunchbreak -- the thing I had forgotten, for Spielberg, it was "Jurassic Park". He asked ten people, 5 got it right, 5 got it wrong (2 said "Stephen King"). I'm not saying people are wrong for not caring, but I think we who do care under-estimate how little people who don't care care.

Right, I never fault people for not caring about certain things. We all have our personal interests. I only get upset is when people speak authoritatively about subjects they're clearly ignorant about. But, for example, if someone asked me about reality TV or people famous from Instagram, my ignorance would stunning to them because of how little I care about those things.

[Bolo Seagull]

Originally Posted by moviflicilm

Tyler Perry was mentioned earlier through my post, and I agree. It doesn't hurt that he's also someone who has a million dollar entertainment production that been doing theater and tv alongside the film stuff. Plus the Medea persona, no matter how cringe-worthy many of us find it, has popular cache with many average viewers.

Tyler Perry is in the same boat as Woody Allen, they're famous film directors, but the reason most people know them is because they act in their own films. The actors are what most audiences see when they look at a film.

Technically, Shyamalan also acts in his films, but I would argue that his ability to create a brand for himself had little to do with his acting. He's not the face on the poster the way Allen and Perry are.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

Regarding the Cameron discussion his Aliens blows Alien away IMHO but Alien is still great.

Aliens is basically just a remake of A L I E N but relacing all the horror/mystery & suspense with action. They ****ed up the original design of the alien good & proper, plus Paul Reiser... WTF?! I'd rather watch Alen3 than Aliens

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by 78deluxe

I agree with the Ford assessment.

However, Hitchcock is more well known than actors and actresses in his films and yes - he used some big names at the time.

That is helped by Hitchcock Presents & his cameos

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by joy-division

Aliens is basically just a remake of A L I E N but relacing all the horror/mystery & suspense with action. They ****ed up the original design of the alien good & proper, plus Paul Reiser... WTF?! I'd rather watch Alen3 than Aliens

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Aliens is one of my top 20 favorite films.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

If audiences identify Nolan as the director of his big hit movies, then why do the advertisements still say "From the director of" instead of using his name? I think that Chris Nolan *could* be famous if he wanted to, but he seems to deliberately eschew that as long as Hollywood knows who he is.

Because that is down to the marketing people & you will see it with the majority of films & trailers. Just 30 minutes ago a traler for Cars 3 was on tv "From the team that brought you Finding Dory & Inside Out" no mention of The Good Dinosaur as that didn't do as well as the others

Nolan is known for not being media friendly he wants the films to sell themselves & doesn't care to be a celeb which I applaud

[joy-division]

As for directors that everyday people would know, Tim Burton would be up there, at least back in the day day when he made films on a steady flow. He has such a distinct look, used a lot of the same actors & of course Danny Elfman

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by moviflicilm

Thanks for the listing. What was in my post was worded wrongly, even as if I was making a point about most of the cast not selling the film to a wider audience. Of course how could I forget Harry Styles, even if we don't know how big of a role his character plays in the film.

So you saying that none of those 3 actors cannot hold hold a movie by themselves, & are not considered high ranking?

It doesn't matter how bigor small a part that twat Harry has, his followers will do anything associated him. That's the only reason I can fathom as to why he is in this film

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by joy-division

Because that is down to the marketing people & you will see it with the majority of films & trailers.

My point is that if his name meant something they would use it prominently in marketing, like they do with the few directors whose name will actually sell tickets. It seems like Nolan has managed to get all of the best parts of being a famous director without having to deal with celebrity, and I think that's a cool thing, but it's part of why I don't think he's a brand name director like Spielberg or Tarantino or even Shyamalan, who sacrificed his talent at the altar of fame.

[cjamescook]

I notice that the Criterion release of "Woman of the Year" is 60% off at Amazon.

Does the sale reflect a lack of popularity?

Should we therefore be worried that it may portend a future dearth of releases of this type (1930s/1940s/1950s romcom/screwball and American classics) on Blu-ray by Criterion?

Speaking of releases by all distributors on Blu-ray, back catalog Westerns and horror films seem to have found their footing for blu-ray release (sales), but other genres? No so much.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

I notice that the Criterion release of "Woman of the Year" is 60% off at Amazon.

Does the sale reflect a lack of popularity?

Should we therefore be worried that it may portend a future dearth of releases of this type (1930s/1940s/1950s romcom/screwball and American classics) on Blu-ray by Criterion?

Speaking of releases by all distributors on Blu-ray, back catalog Westerns and horror films seem to have found their footing for blu-ray release (sales), but other genres? No so much.

I don't know to be honest. I've never seen newer Criterion releases drop to this degree on Amazon. But I'm not complaining. Older films in general are probably a tough sell. I watched "Woman of the Year" over the long weekend and thought it was fantastic. Hepburn and Tracy were incredible together.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

I notice that the Criterion release of "Woman of the Year" is 60% off at Amazon.

Does the sale reflect a lack of popularity?

Should we therefore be worried that it may portend a future dearth of releases of this type (1930s/1940s/1950s romcom/screwball and American classics) on Blu-ray by Criterion?

Speaking of releases by all distributors on Blu-ray, back catalog Westerns and horror films seem to have found their footing for blu-ray release (sales), but other genres? No so much.

It's listed on Amazon as the #1 Best Seller in Romance. Maybe this is a trial balloon to see if lowering the price will increase sales enough to offset the lower profit margin. If so, I hope that we see more aggressive pricing on "mainstream" Criterions in the future.

I try not to see every trend as a portent of the imminent demise of physical media.

[Scottie]

I wonder if the price drops are related to competition with Barnes & Noble's 50% off sales.

[moviflicilm]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

I notice that the Criterion release of "Woman of the Year" is 60% off at Amazon.

Does the sale reflect a lack of popularity?

Should we therefore be worried that it may portend a future dearth of releases of this type (1930s/1940s/1950s romcom/screwball and American classics) on Blu-ray by Criterion?

Speaking of releases by all distributors on Blu-ray, back catalog Westerns and horror films seem to have found their footing for blu-ray release (sales), but other genres? No so much.

There will be some kind of audience for old Hollywood that some standard titles will be released through Criterion or Warner Archives. The issue is that the demand isn't high for something of the nature of "Woman of the Year," which will have sites like Amazon lower the prices. With Blu-Ray being a niche home video format, many films of a selected genre probably won't see the light of day.


EDIT: See the above post. The sale is going well and I'd imagine they want to compete with B&N Criterion sale.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

My point is that if his name meant something they would use it prominently in marketing, like they do with the few directors whose name will actually sell tickets. It seems like Nolan has managed to get all of the best parts of being a famous director without having to deal with celebrity, and I think that's a cool thing, but it's part of why I don't think he's a brand name director like Spielberg or Tarantino or even Shyamalan, who sacrificed his talent at the altar of fame.

This is not aimed at you but in these last few pages of posts
At the end of the end of the day, just like all the rest, he's a director. Why label them as an X director or Y director?

[moviflicilm]

Originally Posted by joy-division

So you saying that none of those 3 actors cannot hold hold a movie by themselves, & are not considered high ranking?

It doesn't matter how bigor small a part that twat Harry has, his followers will do anything associated him. That's the only reason I can fathom as to why he is in this film

What I meant wasn't their pedigree but rather bring an certain audience to the film that wouldn't otherwise see it. Nothing to do with art but rather business.

With Harry I would think he has great respect for Nolan along with trying to push himself into acting. I don't think this is some cynical marketing scheme to lauded teenage girls into the theaters.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

I notice that the Criterion release of "Woman of the Year" is 60% off at Amazon.

Does the sale reflect a lack of popularity?

Should we therefore be worried that it may portend a future dearth of releases of this type (1930s/1940s/1950s romcom/screwball and American classics) on Blu-ray by Criterion?

Speaking of releases by all distributors on Blu-ray, back catalog Westerns and horror films seem to have found their footing for blu-ray release (sales), but other genres? No so much.

It apparently has to do with Amazon price matching, of all companies, Walmart. So, it has nothing to do with a lack of popularity.
The Hot Deals section has the details on the price matching.

[ShellOilJunior]

This is Criterion related. He coined the phrase "A Hard Day's Night". Ringo is 77 today!


Favorite Ringo: his drumming on The End.

[ElectricPeterTork]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

This is Criterion related. He coined the phrase "A Hard Day's Night". Ringo is 77 today!


Favorite Ringo: his drumming on The End.

Ringo is one of the best drummers ever, especially in the context of the Beatles.

They needed someone who would lay back and be a solid bedrock to build on. Almost any other drummer wouldn't have been able to do that, except maybe Charlie Watts.

The End was like the only time he got to showcase his stuff.

[moviflicilm]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

My point is that if his name meant something they would use it prominently in marketing, like they do with the few directors whose name will actually sell tickets. It seems like Nolan has managed to get all of the best parts of being a famous director without having to deal with celebrity, and I think that's a cool thing, but it's part of why I don't think he's a brand name director like Spielberg or Tarantino or even Shyamalan, who sacrificed his talent at the altar of fame.

Directors tend to be quiet personalities when it comes to this stuff, as they don't appear much in the media, nor do they want their name thrown into the marketing. This is part of why directors aren't often recognized among non film buffs, as I think we are the only community that values the people behind the camera over the faced stars. As for Nolan position, I still stand he's probably in the ten most famous living directors, even with this marketing silence.

After Spielberg, who would you say is more recognized by the public, Scorsese or Tarantino? Scorsese been directing for much longer even if not all of his fllms were hits with the public. Tarantino broke out fairly early in his career and retain his public persona throughout the years since Pulp Fiction. I'm trying to think of a demographic that wouldn't recognize one name without knowing the other name.