The Criterion Collection

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I'm pretty sure the film is a perfect example of "what you see is what you get".

It's simply meant to be as exploitative as possible while simultaneously being unlike anything ever made or after before it.

True, and I suppose various scenes like the church stuff is solely meant to shock more than satirize.

And yet, the more I thought about it the more I wondered how much of the film satirizes aspects of 60s culture. The video essay confirms that there's an "us and them" theme to the characters on-screen--by the climax, it reaches a level of social violence that seems echo the civil unrest that went on in previous years.

I just don't know if it's intentional or not. If there is a theme to this, it's probably more along the lines of "there's a maniac in all of us and we're all maniacs."

[Scottie]

According to Amazon, the release date for the repackage of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World is October 10, 2017.

This release will come on 2 BDs and a plastic case, in contrast to the original release coming on 2 BDs, 3 DVDs, and a flimsy DigiPack.

[captainron_howdy]

Originally Posted by joy-division

Any reason why Quadrophenia is a Criterion release but Tommy isn't?

Quadrophenia may be my favourite The Who album, but there is no doubt in my mind that Tommy is a much better film Is it a rights issue?

And speaking of Quadrophenia, do you thnk Brighton Rock should be given the Criterion treatment?

Tommy is amazing! There is a very good blu out from sony, but it's bare bones. Not sure if it's a rights thing or not.

[ThisKid]

Originally Posted by iScottie

According to Amazon, the release date for the repackage of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World is October 10, 2017.

This release will come on 2 BDs and a plastic case, in contrast to the original release coming on 2 BDs, 3 DVDs, and a flimsy DigiPack.

The digipack was the first Criterion I'd ever bought.

And I still treasure this release to this day.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by joy-division

Any reason why Quadrophenia is a Criterion release but Tommy isn't?

In terms of pop culture prominence (without commenting on artistic merit at all), Tommy is a perennial seller, Quadrophenia is a footnote.

[Ray Jackson]

I watched Ghost World for the first time last night.

All of you do realize that we're Steve Buscemi.

I have seen no better cinematic representation of our little thread here, than the following scene.

...it's chilling.

[Show spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE_2Xy8aXUM

[Cocophone]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I watched Ghost World for the first time last night.

All of you do realize that we're Steve Buscemi.

I have seen no better cinematic representation of our little thread here, than the following scene.

...it's chilling.

Steve Buscemi was at least self aware. Some of his fellow collectors were not.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

I don't disagree with that part in Ghost World completely but I personally love collecting films because I love having them and watching them and doesn't have anything to do with any inability to connect with people. I collect because I love watching films whether I'm in a relationship or not. I don't really agree with that part of the scene that collecting is about filling some void for loneliness or an inability to connect with anybody. For me anyways.

[GasmaskAvenger]

My thoughts on Stalker (1979):

It was my first time actually sitting through one of Tarkovsky's works and...wow. What a really fascinating film.

I really dug the contrast between the city and "The Zone", with the former looking like post-nuke Sheffield, England at the end of "Threads" and the latter, while still wet, far more tranquil and in order. This made the opening half hour way more tense than I anticipated.

I also liked the dynamics between our three protagonists, with the Stalker himself being the believer, the Writer being the skeptic realist and the Professor as the seemingly neutral party (until you actually learn of his real purpose of tagging along in the last half hour). Some of their shittalk was genuinely fun, as was their ideologies clashing at several points in the film.

The film's ending is also pretty good and shows off a reality of us who want to believe that "miracles can happen" most often than not a fantasy, as well as the Stalker's wife excellent closing monologue, painting a vivid enough view of her and the Stalker's relationship.

Great movie all around. I'm actually now interested in checking more Tarkovsky out from here on out. Probably the best Criterion discovery i've made since "Le Cercle Rouge" and also the first time i've felt compelled to watch more works of a specific director since the time I watched Zulawski's "Possession".

[theater dreamer]

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I love watching movies. They relax me. They entertain me. They educate me. Sometimes, they scare the piss out of me. Being a film collector, and being a normal, fully-functioning, sociable member of society are not mutually exclusive things, and I take issue with anybody or anything that would suggest otherwise. Having not seen Ghost World, I can't comment on Buscemi's character, but perhaps he's just a loner that likes films? Would he still be a loner absent the ability to watch those movies? Likely yes.

I have friends that love films as much as I do. I have friends that like movies, but aren't as hardcore as I (we) are; but some of them have started becoming more serious about the art form after reading my comments on what I'm watching. The woman I'm in a relationship with liked movies before I met her, but was never serious about them. She'd go to the theater to see whatever was showing with her friends. But since we've started dating, I've seen her interest increase substantially.

She's still never seen Star Wars, though. I need to remedy that.

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

I don't disagree with that part in Ghost World completely but I personally love collecting films because I love having them and watching them and doesn't have anything to do with any inability to connect with people. I collect because I love watching films whether I'm in a relationship or not. I don't really agree with that part of the scene that collecting is about filling some void for loneliness or an inability to connect with anybody. For me anyways.

[GasmaskAvenger]

I also must comment on some people's complaints on the film's length and pacing.

Yes, its nearly three hours long and yes, it moves at a rather slow pace, but the atmosphere Tarkovsky crafts totally sucked me in within the first five minutes and the two times I had to pause the film, it was rather painful to do so as I was really invested in the film's journey.

Its almost like a metaphysical post-apocalyptic sci-fi version of Coppla's Apocalypse Now, minus Vietnam, a bloated Marlon Brandon and everything else that made that film easily appealing to viewers. However, I do think Stalker could very well be Tarkovsky's most accessible film (from what I gather of his other works).


Now I know some who've seen me post on this forum, you may be asking "so how could you enjoy Stalker but dislike The VVitch, Dust Devil and Ti West in general?".

Here's the thing: I was enthralled by the journey Tarkovsky crafted out of the source material. Dust Devil was too damn unfocused and full of gibberish nonsense for me to give a shit (it also doesn't help that Richard Stanley's previous film "Hardware", was a way better, more engaging film all-around), The VVitch had a fantastic first and last twenty minutes but were both sandwiched between a barren wasteland of almost nothing to make me give a shit and Ti West...well...Ti West meanders too damn much to the point of straight up absurdity as a horrible misguided attempt to create "tension" and "mood". It also doesn't help that these movies were meant to be horror films, but left me terribly high and dry.

Tarkovsky's film, on the other hand, exceeded my expectations and I am eager to rewatch it again in the coming years.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I love watching movies. They relax me. They entertain me. They educate me. Sometimes, they scare the piss out of me. Being a film collector, and being a normal, fully-functioning, sociable member of society are not mutually exclusive things, and I take issue with anybody or anything that would suggest otherwise. Having not seen Ghost World, I can't comment on Buscemi's character, but perhaps he's just a loner that likes films? Would he still be a loner absent the ability to watch those movies? Likely yes.

I have friends that love films as much as I do. I have friends that like movies, but aren't as hardcore as I (we) are; but some of them have started becoming more serious about the art form after reading my comments on what I'm watching. The woman I'm in a relationship with liked movies before I met her, but was never serious about them. She'd go to the theater to see whatever was showing with her friends. But since we've started dating, I've seen her interest increase substantially.

She's still never seen Star Wars, though. I need to remedy that.

Very good post! Yeah Buscemi is a loner in the film and there isn't anything wrong with that. That's what I have issues with in that scene. It makes it sound like collecting is a bad or unhealthy thing. I love the film but never liked the dialogue in that particular scene. I'm a loner myself to a degree but I have friends that I hang out with and have been in quite a few relationships. I don't know many people at all though that are as passionate about, love, watch or collect films the way I do except people on these forums.

I just don't like when loners are always perceived in a negative way in films for the most part. That's one of the reasons I think the casting of Ryan Gosling in Drive was perfect. He's not some creepy looking serial killer and they don't portray being a loner in a bad light in that film (which may or may not be arguable)

[StarDestroyer52]

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

I don't disagree with that part in Ghost World completely but I personally love collecting films because I love having them and watching them and doesn't have anything to do with any inability to connect with people. I collect because I love watching films whether I'm in a relationship or not. I don't really agree with that part of the scene that collecting is about filling some void for loneliness or an inability to connect with anybody. For me anyways.

Same here. I collect for the sole fact I love films and am a film/TV buff. I don't buy this argument that collecting is a substitute for loneliness or a lack of a social life. Since I have a very functional social life. Every once in a while I just love to watch movies whenever I want without worrying if they're on TV or just for the love of it.

[javy]

Now I want to purchase Ghost World. Judging from that one clip alone it looks great.

On the collecting issue, I have a wife and three children, and I work. I'm lucky if I get to knock out three movies on a weekend. Sometimes I can knock out four. Five if I'm super lucky. Collecting is not exclusive to people who need to fill a void in their life, but it obviously does happen. With that said, just because that 40 year old virgin finally got a life didn't mean he had to sell off all his cool shit. I never understood that.

Yay for movies!

[Thebunk]

Ok, apologies in advance but this is another "I need recommendations that are blind buys" during the sale. Right now here is my shortlist (again, these will be blind buys):

Before Trilogy
Carnival of Souls
Yi Yi
Close Up
Don't Look Now
Also open to other recs.


Now for a frame of reference, I would say I lean more towards modern films and have a hard time getting into films if they are really dated (especially from an acting perspective). I would say the top Criterions I own are:

Three Color Trilogy
Dazed and Confused
Fear and Loathing
Mulholland Drive
The Dekalog
The Double Life of Veronique
2 Days 1 Night
La Promesse
High and Low
Seven Samurai

I am not much of a Bergman fan, or the other Samurai style Kurasowa films (have see a few and cannot get past the theatrical acting). Also of the list above, I have most of the other Directors offerings (ie Dardennes, Kieslowski, etc).

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by Thebunk

Ok, apologies in advance but this is another "I need recommendations that are blind buys" during the sale. Right now here is my shortlist (again, these will be blind buys):

Before Trilogy
Carnival of Souls
Yi Yi
Close Up
Don't Look Now
Also open to other recs.


Now for a frame of reference, I would say I lean more towards modern films and have a hard time getting into films if they are really dated (especially from an acting perspective). I would say the top Criterions I own are:

Three Color Trilogy
Dazed and Confused
Fear and Loathing
Mulholland Drive
The Dekalog
The Double Life of Veronique
2 Days 1 Night
La Promesse
High and Low
Seven Samurai

I am not much of a Bergman fan, or the other Samurai style Kurasowa films (have see a few and cannot get past the theatrical acting). Also of the list above, I have most of the other Directors offerings (ie Dardennes, Kieslowski, etc).

If you're fond of Dazed and Confused or any other Linklater, you must go with the Before trilogy. It remains the release of the year for me, and they're films you'll want to return to again and again.

I try to recommend Yi Yi to everyone (my avatar is a still from the film), but I sometimes overlook the fact that it's a near three hour Taiwanese familial picture when I do this. Nothing you recommended would have me believe that this is a definite purchase for you, but.. it's just so damn good that I'm throwing it a shout anyways.

You may want to give Don't Look Now a go. It's heavy on mood and the editing is about as good as it gets.

Every film you recommended is great, but I'd go with the Linklater out of the bunch. Also, I realize you don't have it on your list, but what with you being a Dardenne fan and all, I urge you to look into L'Argent. I watched it last week and was immediately stuck at how much it resembled their work as a whole.

[20th Century Boy]

Originally Posted by Thebunk

Ok, apologies in advance but this is another "I need recommendations that are blind buys" during the sale. Right now here is my shortlist (again, these will be blind buys):

Before Trilogy
Carnival of Souls
Yi Yi
Close Up
Don't Look Now
Also open to other recs.


Now for a frame of reference, I would say I lean more towards modern films and have a hard time getting into films if they are really dated (especially from an acting perspective). I would say the top Criterions I own are:

Three Color Trilogy
Dazed and Confused
Fear and Loathing
Mulholland Drive
The Dekalog
The Double Life of Veronique
2 Days 1 Night
La Promesse
High and Low
Seven Samurai

I am not much of a Bergman fan, or the other Samurai style Kurasowa films (have see a few and cannot get past the theatrical acting). Also of the list above, I have most of the other Directors offerings (ie Dardennes, Kieslowski, etc).

I was about to jump right into rec when I noticed your comment above which I have bolded...Yeesh. Narrows my recs considerably. But don't worry. We can still be friends.

I second YiYi, albeit with the caveats the above poster noted.

Eating Raoul is a personal fav, but I'm a huge fan of the Roger Corman produced films of the 70s/80s.

Not really a fan of GDT but I adore Pan's Labrynth and thank CC for rescuing that title from it's awful previous release (ditto for A Hard Day's Night)

I dunno if I can recommend A Touch of Zen to you given your comments about samurai flicks. It's not Japanese/samurai but is of the old school martial arts era.

12 Angry Men is an easy rec, as is Videodrome. The box set including Bob Rafelson's work has probably been my most treasured CC purchase. The Monkees' HEAD is mad cap brilliance.

But above all: Gilliam! Gilliam! Gilliam!

EDIT: assuming from F&LILV that you like the weirder stuff.

[Thebunk]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

If you're fond of Dazed and Confused or any other Linklater, you must go with the Before trilogy. It remains the release of the year for me, and they're films you'll want to return to again and again.

I try to recommend Yi Yi to everyone (my avatar is a still from the film), but I sometimes overlook the fact that it's a near three hour Taiwanese familial picture when I do this. Nothing you recommended would have me believe that this is a definite purchase for you, but.. it's just so damn good that I'm throwing it a shout anyways.

You may want to give Don't Look Now a go. It's heavy on mood and the editing is about as good as it gets.

Every film you recommended is great, but I'd go with the Linklater out of the bunch. Also, I realize you don't have it on your list, but what with you being a Dardenne fan and all, I urge you to look into L'Argent. I watched it last week and was immediately stuck at how much it resembled their work as a whole.

Thanks for the reply.

I am leaning towards the Before Trilogy.

Regarding LArgent, I am interested to get your take on it. I saw PickPocket and really never got the love. That said, The Dardennes Brothers are basically my favorite living Directors. I have all of their CC blus already bans have Le Fils and L'Enfant on DVD. What makes you compare L'Argent to thenoutput of The Dardennes Brothers?

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by Thebunk

Thanks for the reply.

I am leaning towards the Before Trilogy.

Regarding LArgent, I am interested to get your take on it. I saw PickPocket and really never got the love. That said, The Dardennes Brothers are basically my favorite living Directors. I have all of their CC blus already bans have Le Fils and L'Enfant on DVD. What makes you compare L'Argent to thenoutput of The Dardennes Brothers?

I think it's possible to not be taken with Pickpocket and still be won over by this. If the "model" acting isn't your thing, however, then I'd look elsewhere. The portrait of a lower economical status and how the people within it attempt to cope and justify themselves through a simple act is the commonality here. It felt like a merge from the Dardennes' earlier work in terms of content and later in regards to form. Although I'd qualify this as something bleaker than anything they've done.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

Well FWWM is pretty much a waste, since it's virtually the same disc.

But Barry Lyndon is an A+, just because it's in the correct aspect ratio now (not to mention a new 4k scan). You say Personal Shopper is the only movie "worth it", but you don't even know what The Lure is, so how do you know it's not also "worth it"? Vampyr is fantastic, as is Othello. Pretty great month.

Barry Lyndon is my #4 favorite movie of all-time. I'm going to get this release, mostly because of the supplements which I usually never care about on any other releases.

Can someone elaborate on the following, though? The current disc has it in 1:78 to 1 (which I think translates to 16:9 if the math in my head is right) and that means it takes up the full screen. I'm not saying there's not any reason to be excited about BL in the correct aspect ratio, but why, though?

1:66 to 1 will show ever so slightly less on the left and right, correct? I want things to be "proper" and "correct" as much as the next Steve Buscemi on this thread, but I don't know why this is a reason to be over-excited.

Anyone?