The Criterion Collection

[anthonyls]

What an incredible month. I think I'll buy all of them.

[20th Century Boy]

To all the Ray and Kurosawa fans: does the release of new titles in their filmography bode well for their rights to previously released titles? I'm seriously behind on trying to collect all their Criterion releases. Been waiting for a really slow couple of months on one-off releases.

[JoeBuck]

Originally Posted by 20th Century Boy

Suddenly I don't feel so lonely.

As far as the Potemkin homage, I haven't even brought it up because...just too low a blow.

When my neighbor and I began discussing the homage, even though he tried defending the film at first, when he got to that point he just started laughing and pretty much joined my side of the fence about the film by discussion's end.

Trust me, lots of people share your opinion. I remember a LOT of IMDB threads from people who shared it, and not just trolls going "movie sucked, it was old hurr durr".

[NoirFan]

Hell of a month, will likely buy all six!

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by JoeBuck

I said it before and I'll say it again, The Untouchables is trash. Funny that you actually say this though as I know someone who was in a filmmaking program where his teacher really did show it as an example of how not to make a movie. Caught a lot of his students off guard, apparently.
Costners performance was more than bland, it was awful. A lot of it was also just really dumb, the pointless battleship potemkin homage included.
It was a shame too because I went into this movie with quite a lot of excitement. Boy did that change pretty quick.

I'll join the chorus of people claiming that The Untouchables is indeed trash. Certainly one of the more overrated pictures I can think of. (Cinema Paradiso and Pan's Labyrinth are my top two in this category). It's just a hodgepodge of all sorts of different tones that don't fit together at all and the entire movie just comes across as a mess. The score may be good on it's own, but like everything else in The Untouchables, it doesn't mesh with what we see on screen.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by JoeBuck

I said it before and I'll say it again, The Untouchables is trash. Funny that you actually say this though as I know someone who was in a filmmaking program where his teacher really did show it as an example of how not to make a movie. Caught a lot of his students off guard, apparently.
Costners performance was more than bland, it was awful. A lot of it was also just really dumb, the pointless battleship potemkin homage included.
It was a shame too because I went into this movie with quite a lot of excitement. Boy did that change pretty quick.

Okay, well I certainly disagree that it's "trash". And I definitely disagree with holding it up as an example of how not to make a movie. I will admit that it has its dumb moments and it's certainly not a deep movie, but it's garnered a lot of critical acclaim over the years and was a very successful movie from a commercial standpoint, so I'm not quite sure what examples can be drawn from it to back that blanket statement up.

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Okay, well I certainly disagree that it's "trash". And I definitely disagree with holding it up as an example of how not to make a movie. I will admit that it has its dumb moments and it's certainly not a deep movie, but it's garnered a lot of critical acclaim over the years and was a very successful movie from a commercial standpoint, so I'm not quite sure what examples can be drawn from it to back that blanket statement up.

Opinions don't need to be backed up with facts when dealing with art. I think it's trash, you don't. That's the end of it. I feel absolutely nothing when watching the film and what others think about it is irrelevant.

[stonecoldjedi]

Super psyched for Night and Lambs. I recently dug out the original Lambs Criterion DVD I got on eBay awhile back.

BTW, anyone else feel like the Silence of the Lambs cover is inspired by Hannibal the TV show's credits sequence?

[malakaheso]

The Untouchables seems to have been reevaluated downwards over the years after Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction changed the face of the crime film. It didn't happen overnight but I don't recall it being commonly referred to as cheesy for most of the 90's.

Some argue that since it's a throwback to old gangster melodramas, calling it cheesy misses the point, but it's all filtered through 80s Hollywood heroism, which simply confirms the impression.

I like The Untouchables a lot, but isn't the film now that it was in the late 80's.

[20th Century Boy]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

Certainly one of the more overrated pictures I can think of. (Cinema Paradiso and Pan's Labyrinth are my top two in this category).

Shit. Just blind bought this.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Include me in with The Untouchables as well. Admittedly I do enjoy it but it's severely overrated. De Niro was completely wrong for the role. Connery's overacting is cringe worthy many times and the rest of the cast is no better in the film. Charles Martin Smith annoyed the hell out of me. I did think Billy Drago was fun though.

Something tells me De Palma didn't have as much creative control with this one.

[20th Century Boy]

Originally Posted by malakaheso

The Untouchables seems to have been reevaluated downwards over the years after Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction changed the face of the crime film. It didn't happen overnight but I don't recall it being commonly referred to as cheesy for most of the 90's.

Some argue that since it's a throwback to old gangster melodramas, calling it cheesy misses the point, but it's all filtered through 80s Hollywood heroism, which simply confirms the impression.

I like The Untouchables a lot, but isn't the film now that it was in the late 80's.

Interesting take on it. I disliked it when it came out, and upon my rewatch a couple years back, but you certainly have a point about a revisionist attitude toward it.

[malakaheso]

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

Something tells me De Palma didn't have as much creative control with this one.

It was an assignment. He needed a hit and he got one.

[20th Century Boy]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

It's just a hodgepodge of all sorts of different tones that don't fit together at all and the entire movie just comes across as a mess. The score may be good on it's own, but like everything else in The Untouchables, it doesn't mesh with what we see on screen.

I agree with this most of all, and I'm someone who thinks pulling off tonal shifts in a film are the most exciting, expert but HARDEST thing to accomplish in the art form.

For an example of a director that is at the top of tonal shifts in film without jumping genres within the film would be Stephen Chow. His shifts in tone from comedy to drama are imperceptible and all properly done within the context of the film. Kung Fu Hustle, CJ7 and Shaolin Soccer in particular. No choppiness, etc. Just smooth transitions.

EDIT: (Well, not all the time, every time. I mean he's part of the Hong Kong Golden era where they pumped out like 7 films a year. But I'm referencing the ones he directed).

[malakaheso]

Re: Bogdanovich. As a whole his career isn't that impressive, but The Last Picture Show and Paper Moon are two of my favourite American films of the 70's. Paper Moon in particular has aged remarkably well.

If you are going to judge him by the standard he set for himself though (i.e to be a chameleon like Hawks and operate successfully in different genres), then I'd say he largely failed, but he had a fascinating career.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

Opinions don't need to be backed up with facts when dealing with art. I think it's trash, you don't. That's the end of it. I feel absolutely nothing when watching the film and what others think about it is irrelevant.

Fair enough, I'm just making conversation! I'd just like to know some of things that people dislike about the movie that contributes to them thinking it's trash. I thought that was the kind of thing people liked to do on a movie related forum.

Originally Posted by malakaheso

The Untouchables seems to have been reevaluated downwards over the years after Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction changed the face of the crime film. It didn't happen overnight but I don't recall it being commonly referred to as cheesy for most of the 90's.

Some argue that since it's a throwback to old gangster melodramas, calling it cheesy misses the point, but it's all filtered through 80s Hollywood heroism, which simply confirms the impression.

I like The Untouchables a lot, but isn't the film now that it was in the late 80's.

Good points. I don't think it reaches the heights of Goodfellas. To me the Untouchables is not really a serious gangster movie, it's an action movie, a western in spats, so maybe some of the elements that others are dismissing are trash I'm embracing as part and parcel of that approach.

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

Include me in with The Untouchables as well. Admittedly I do enjoy it but it's severely overrated. De Niro was completely wrong for the role. Connery's overacting is cringe worthy many times and the rest of the cast is no better in the film. Charles Martin Smith annoyed the hell out of me. I did think Billy Drago was fun though.

Something tells me De Palma didn't have as much creative control with this one.

I'm pretty sure he didn't, it was primarily a director-for-hire movie for De Palma, though the Potemkin homage was definitely his contribution.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by malakaheso

Re: Bogdanovich. As a whole his career isn't that impressive, but The Last Picture Show and Paper Moon are two of my favourite American films of the 70's. Paper Moon in particular has aged remarkably well.

If you are going to judge him by the standard he set for himself though (i.e to be a chameleon like Hawks and operate successfully in different genres), then I'd say he largely failed, but he had a fascinating career.

I'd love a Criterion release for Paper Moon. Fantastic film. Tatum O'Neal's performance is really something.

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by malakaheso

The Untouchables seems to have been reevaluated downwards over the years after Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction changed the face of the crime film. It didn't happen overnight but I don't recall it being commonly referred to as cheesy for most of the 90's.

Some argue that since it's a throwback to old gangster melodramas, calling it cheesy misses the point, but it's all filtered through 80s Hollywood heroism, which simply confirms the impression.

I like The Untouchables a lot, but isn't the film now that it was in the late 80's.

This is an interesting take but I don't agree with it. Plenty of crime films came out long before The Untouchables that were far better and not half as silly. For christ sake, The Godfather came out in 1972. Thief came out in 1981. Manhunter came out in 1986. The Untouchables was silly in 1987 and remains so today.

[malakaheso]

^^How do you explain why it wasn't _generally_ viewed as silly in the 80s though?

[Riddler The Slag]

That Silence of the Lambs is soooooo mine when it comes out. Absolutely cannot wait to revisit this film.