The Criterion Collection

[MifuneFan]

Found it. It wasn't at Wexler, and it was from last February:

Originally Posted by dwk

How about some news/rumors:
At the start of the newest episode of The Canon podcast, they mention that Criterion will be releasing Alexander Payne's Election.

And according to Criterion Cast, Criterion has Laurie Anderson's Heart of a Dog, which will be available from iTunes on March 1st.

[lilboyblu]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

The Lady Vanishes will not play on a Sony BDP S3700. The Criterion "C" appears in the top left corner but the main menu fails to load (I gave it 10 minutes but the screen remained black). The disk has no bronzing, is scratch-free and will play on a PS3 (At least prior to my console biting the dust).

Originally Posted by iap738

Has anyone ever experienced playback issues with their copy of The Lady Vanishes? I've tried playing it twice recently and it simply won't load at all. I've only gotten as far as the black screen with the Criterion 'C' logo. I'm wondering if I'd be able to contact Criterion for a replacement?

It's odd that this one wasn't included on that old recall list, as I ran into the exact same issue as the two gents above. The "Criterion C" before the main menu loads, and then there's nothing but a blank screen afterwards. Contacted Mulvaney for a replacement.

[scottpcusa]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

What film was your gateway into the appreciation of cinema beyond blockbusters? Follow up question: what film opened you up to exploring the Criterion Collection?

I saw a screening of Jean-Luc Godard's Breathless when I was in graduate school in Austin, TX in 1999. That planted a seed that grew and grew as I started to seek out more and more art house, indie, and foreign language films.

The first Criterion I bought was The Darjeeling Limited, and from that point on, I started exploring the Criterion catalog. I now own 70 films from the collection.

[demonx]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

Again, though, the 1925 version is in standard definition, though on a blu-ray disc. At least that's what the review on our site states.

So who to write to release these movies ?? The collection of Cohen says that they can not release Bo do not have the rights to these films.

[billy pilgrim]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

What film was your gateway into the appreciation of cinema beyond blockbusters? Follow up question: what film opened you up to exploring the Criterion Collection?

In the early 70's, I was taking time off from college and living hand to mouth in a nasty low rent apartment outside the Plaza in Kansas City. There was a local art theater on Main Street which showed foreign and art films which a friend of mine turned me onto. We would spend countless hours having our heads expanded and then torn apart by these amazing films! A bit of the noble herb was also usually involved. Ahhh...those were the days!

The two films that seemed to really rearrange all of my brain cells from that period were: Turkish Delight with Rutger Hauer and Fellini's Satyricon. I've never been the same, thank god!

My first Criterion Blu Ray purchase (before I even knew about Criterion!) was The Man Who Fell To Earth by Nicholas Roeg. It's still the crown jewel of my collection.

[StarDestroyer52]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

[B]Criterion - Seven Samurai. The film's greatness has been covered many times and sometimes citing it as a favorite comes off as boring and predictable. Let's not overlook the obvious. It's a great film and a lot of fun.

Seven Samurai and Casablanca are tied for the best films IMO. I was blown away at Seven Samurai and despite being long the plot flies along with never a wasted or dull moment.

[captainron_howdy]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

What film was your gateway into the appreciation of cinema beyond blockbusters? Follow up question: what film opened you up to exploring the Criterion Collection?

Awesome question!

"La Strada" was the film that was my gateway into cinema beyond blockbusters & my intro to Criterion was the original DVD of "Diabolique" my grandfather ordered off of amazon for me & insisted I watch it with him. A lot of titles he recommended over the years, have become criterion collection titles now. Blow-up, Blood Simple, & In Cold Blood to name a few.

[CPinheiro]

Some of Fred Davis' unused covers for Fire Walk With Me:

[Show spoiler]

The second and fourth look so much better than the one they chose, imo.
F-Davis was also responsable for the Mulholland Dr cover and I thought they picked the least interesting option for that release as well.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by CPinheiro

Some of Fred Davis' unused covers for Fire Walk With Me:

[Show spoiler]

The second and fourth look so much better than the one they chose, imo.
F-Davis was also responsable for the Mulholland Dr cover and I thought they picked the least interesting option for that release as well.

They look awful, not sure how final they are, but they look like really basic mockups more than anything...

The first one is ok!

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by CPinheiro

Some of Fred Davis' unused covers for Fire Walk With Me:

[Show spoiler]

The second and fourth look so much better than the one they chose, imo.
F-Davis was also responsable for the Mulholland Dr cover and I thought they picked the least interesting option for that release as well.

Maybe I just like the original posters and no insult meant toward the artist but these are like borderline deviantart fan posters. I'm glad none of these were picked.

I will say though, the glaring photoshop flame replacement he did for the original art looks really off. Should have left it alone.

[joy-division]

Got Woman of the Year Today

[CPinheiro]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

The first one is ok!

Haha I thought the first one was the weirdest, but I guess weird fits with lynch.

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Maybe I just like the original posters and no insult meant toward the artist but these are like borderline deviantart fan posters. I'm glad none of these were picked.

I will say though, the glaring photoshop flame replacement he did for the original art looks really off. Should have left it alone.

I'm the opposite! I usually like when they come with a new art instead of the original poster and I've never been a big fan of FWWM poster... but that just shows how they will never make everyone 100% happy with the cover they end up picking.

[hYPE]

Today's Criterion haul...

[Al_The_Strange]

I watched my copy of Stalker last night. My second time ever viewing. I paid much closer attention to the film this time and it did succeed in immersing me in the meditative state of mind. I found a lot to interpret and think about, despite the pacing. It's a heck of a film--my thoughts are still rather disjointed so I'm still not sure how to approach an interpretative article, but here's a review I drafted up. The Criterion Blu-Ray is a thing of beauty--the picture is dang sharp, clear, and vivid, and the sound is gentle and tranquil.

Originally Posted by Al

Next time you take a roadside picnic and throw something away in the grass, take a moment to consider what happens next. Ants will come out to pick up and carry the crumbs away. Birds will peck at seeds and fruits. Maybe some badger will grab a wrapper and get his head stuck in it. Suppose you chuck an alkaline battery away, or a canister of oil? Mere leftovers for us become mysterious and deadly artifacts for lesser creatures.

This was the basic premise behind Arkady and Boris Strugatsky's book, Roadside Picnic. What if aliens landed on Earth and left some junk behind? People and governments would surely covet it. It could become a whole new kind of black market. But what effects would such artifacts have on lesser beings like us?

1979's Stalker adopts this premise into a one-of-a-kind vision. From its opening credits onward, the film is seeped in hard, gritty textures and drab colors. In this bleak setting, the nameless Stalker (Alexander Kaidanovsky, notably bald, scrawny, and kinda alien-looking) takes a job to escort two clients into the Zone--the place where a meteorite crashed and became quarantined by the military. One man is a writer (Anatoly Solonitsyn) looking for inspiration. The other, a professor (Nikolai Grinko) looking for scientific discovery. Despite the heavy guard and the threat of never coming back, the three break through and progress through the Zone. We never see any psychical threats, but the trio always react with fear and anxiety over invisible traps and unseen entities. Passing through dark corridors and ruins, truths are unearthed about each character, which puts their whole endeavor into question and endangers them all.

This is a long and mopey film. Gone are the pulp fiction roots of the original story--Tarkovsky sought to craft a meditative experience out of this, sculpting viewers' time as he always did to draw out each moment and force you to think about what's on screen and what's being said. It might be agony for some viewers, because each shot lingers for long, long, long stretches of time. It kills the pacing, especially when the characters stop moving and decide to discuss philosophy for minutes on end.

Fortunately, this film will reward patient viewers. The combination of dreary visuals and sharp writing directs the audience to contemplate greater implications of the journey. It's not so much about three guys walking through the woods--it's an allegory to religious pilgrimage, and synonymous to living life itself. The entire trip challenges each characters' faith, as they question the existence and validity of an all-powerful Room that promises them happiness and fulfilled wishes. Each performer puts on melancholy and understated performances, accentuating the stillness of the cinematography and the quietness of the soundtrack. The sheer mood suggests cynicism towards society, the arts, science, religion--the entirety of mankind. Viewers can infer any number of conclusions, as the Stalker himself distresses over how people lost their way.

This is one of the ultimates in arthouse cinema. Stalker has cinematography like no other, showcasing places and people so dark, but with a delicate touch that implies greater beauty in nature and power of forces above and beyond mankind. Best of all, the film offers content worth contemplating and reflecting on. Tarkovsky and the crew suffered toxic environments to realize this vision. Then, the film was destroyed--the Soviet laboratories were unfamiliar with the film stock and it was improperly developed. Tensions with the cinematographer (who was subsequently fired) only accentuated the frustration and cynicism Tarkovsky felt, before having to reshoot the entire film again. What's left might be a reflection of his own anguish. And we are given a chance to stare into his abyss, to see what stares back at us.

If you have the interest, the patience, the willpower, the film is a must-see.

4/5

[jcs913]

Review for the upcoming Sid and Nancy from dvdbeaver:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film6/blu-r...cy_blu-ray.htm


I have seen the film many times in the theater over the years and am skeptical about how bright CC has made it look. Yes, the MGM was very drab and dark, but that was how it was somewhat shown theatrically. Interesting that CC 'brightened' it up to make it 'pop' more. The Nancy scene on the floor in the bathroom is a huge difference between the 2 releases. I like how more of the detail pops, but it's accuracy is suspect. I went to double check the 'approved by Alex Cox' part in the extras on CC's website and I do not see it. I am then assuming he was not part of the restoration/transfer at all? Curious as to the thoughts on he people feel the brightness is.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by jcs913

Review for the upcoming Sid and Nancy from dvdbeaver:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film6/blu-r...cy_blu-ray.htm


I have seen the film many times in the theater over the years and am skeptical about how bright CC has made it look. Yes, the MGM was very drab and dark, but that was how it was somewhat shown theatrically. Interesting that CC 'brightened' it up to make it 'pop' more. The Nancy scene on the floor in the bathroom is a huge difference between the 2 releases. I like how more of the detail pops, but it's accuracy is suspect. I went to double check the 'approved by Alex Cox' part in the extras on CC's website and I do not see it. I am then assuming he was not part of the restoration/transfer at all? Curious as to the thoughts on he people feel the brightness is.

CC didn't brighten anything themselves, it was restored last year for its 30th anniversary. It is brighter, but the brightness doesn't look out of place. It looks much improved from the MGM release.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tube...ature=youtu.be

Edit: I'm not 100% sure if it's the same restoration, or whether additional tweaks were done to the CC release. Both do appear to be noticeably brighter than previous releases in any event.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

CC didn't brighten anything themselves, it was restored last year for its 30th anniversary. It is brighter, but the brightness doesn't look out of place. It looks much improved from the MGM release.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tube...ature=youtu.be

I assume it's the same master SC used in their UK release last year? Strange that beaver did not compare that one to the CC. It just seems a huge difference in the brightness over the MGM and theater. Strangely, some of those caps look 'too fresh'. Looking forward to seeing the film in a newer perspective then I guess, as I never picked up the SC release last year.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by jcs913

I assume it's the same master SC used in their UK release last year? Strange that beaver did not compare that one to the CC. It just seems a huge difference in the brightness over the MGM and theater. Strangely, some of those caps look 'too fresh'. Looking forward to seeing the film in a newer perspective then I guess, as I never picked up the SC release last year.

I'm trying to find info on it. I thought after looking at the trailer, that it was the same, but Pro-B did a review of the UK release last year, and it looks different. I'm reading on another forum that this new transfer may have been done in-house. I think both are similarly bright, just mostly the color changes differ, and I think the CC release may also be more detailed. Still reading up a little, but it would be rare to see two different restorations within a year of each other, if true.

[llj]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

What film was your gateway into the appreciation of cinema beyond blockbusters? Follow up question: what film opened you up to exploring the Criterion Collection?

I don't remember. I was already looking for something edgier in my early teens, which led me to seek out Natural Born Killers and Pulp Fiction.

Soon after, I began renting foreign movies and some of the earliest ones I remember choosing were Kagemusha, Belle de Jour and Persona.

My first Criterion film...that's a toughie. The earliest I really recall focusing on Criterion as a brand was in the early days of DVD when I always noticed they were the most expensive DVDs in all the stores. I distinctly recall my first Criterion experience as rentals rather than purchases since I couldn't afford them. Earliest Criterions that I can recall watching were Ikiru and Godard's Contempt.

My first Criterion purchase was Death of a Cyclist. So, I started buying them late.

[sawdustandtinsel]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

What film was your gateway into the appreciation of cinema beyond blockbusters? Follow up question: what film opened you up to exploring the Criterion Collection?

I was lucky enough to see Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon in theaters when I was 14 and it moved me to tears. Later that year my parents were kind enough to buy it for me but I made them take it back because they bought me the English dubbed version and a monster was born. As far as Criterion goes I'm really not sure but the first blu-rays I bought were Fish Tank, Hunger, and White Material.