The Criterion Collection

[theater dreamer]

I stumbled across one of her movies on HBO a few months ago-I had to look up the title just now. Serious Moonlight. Not a good film, but she looked fantastic for a woman that was (at the time) pushing 50. She's aged very well.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I've never seen Flesh and Bone, but I've got to admit that I'm pretty intrigued about it after taking a look at the Internet Movie Database page. There were some solid neo-noir movies during the early 1990s.

You know what? I’ve never seen it either but I’ve heard nothing but good things about it over the years. I don’t know why I’ve avoided it. If it shows up on Netflix or one of my movie channels on cable, I’m watching it.

[mja345]

Has a screenwriter/director's career ever gone from interesting to uninteresting faster than Steve Kloves'? First four projects were "Racing With the Moon", "The Fabulous Baker Boys", "Flesh and Bone", and the terrific "Wonder Boys", two of which he directed, then (cue wet fart sound) he just started penning Harry Potter screenplays.

[malakaheso]

Originally Posted by mja345

I saw "The Presidio" recently, which is pretty bad, but Meg Ryan is really sexy in that film. Totally opposite of her rom-com persona she adopted in the 90s. She was also in the highly underrated "Hurlyburly", which will probably never get a BD release because of the Kevin Spacey factor.

Hurlyburly is good but it's also kind of second rate Mamet.

Meg Ryan is milquetoast, just like Quaid. They were perfect for each other. I'll give Ryan credit for at least trying to grow a little with films like In The Cut, but unfortunately the masses weren't interested in seeing her in films like that, so when she aged out of the romantic comedy genre (or ruined her looks via surgery, depending on your POV), her time was up.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by malakaheso

Hurlyburly is good but it's also kind of second rate Mamet.

Meg Ryan is milquetoast, just like Quaid. They were perfect for each other. I'll give Ryan credit for at least trying to grow a little with films like In The Cut, but unfortunately the masses weren't interested in seeing her in films like that, so when she aged out of the romantic comedy genre (or ruined her looks via surgery, depending on your POV), her time was up.

Didn't David Rabe write "Hurlyburly"? Rabe is kind of a slightly lesser version of Mamet, but still pretty good. "Streamers" is also really good, which he wrote.

[malakaheso]

Yes Rabe wrote it. I left out the like (i.e plays like second rate Mamet). It is a well acted film. I have the dvd lying around somewhere. It was that film that made me suspect that Spacey was a little too good at playing cold hearted pricks!

[mja345]

Originally Posted by malakaheso

Yes Rabe wrote it. I left out the like (i.e plays like second rate Mamet). It is a well acted film. I have the dvd lying around somewhere. It was that film that made me suspect that Spacey was a little too good at playing cold hearted pricks!

Also, the fact that Spacey and Sean Penn pass around Anna Paquin, who was like 16 at the time the movie was made, makes that film practically un-releasable now for WB, who currently own its rights. The only reason that film hasn't received more scrutiny, like "American Beauty" (which is a far inferior film to "Hurlyburly" IMO), is that the average think piece writer has probably never heard of it.

[Scottie]

REVIEW




PACKAGING

[captainron_howdy]

Originally Posted by mja345

Didn't David Rabe write "Hurlyburly"? Rabe is kind of a slightly lesser version of Mamet, but still pretty good. "Streamers" is also really good, which he wrote.

I'll have to check out HurlyBurly......Streamers is def. a good one imo. I always liked Casualties of War a lot too.

[ravenus]

I recently saw the 1936 HG Wells adaptation Things to Come (on the UK Network blu-ray, but I assume the film is equally of interest to the Criterion audience).

This is an odd film, a combination of some wonderful visual wizardry and sense of scale with an awfully stilted and preachy narrative about how socialist-minded scientific progress is the eternal saviour and great equalizer of mankind. It reminds me a fair deal of Fritz Lang's Metropolis, with less of the expressionist imagery.

To summarize the unwieldy narrative: The aftermath of a hypothetical Second World War (an uncomfortably close prediction as history would reveal) brings most of civilization to its needs and nations are reduced almost to tribe-like status, with constant infighting and resource shortage pushing them back to the dark age. Somehow in all this an organization called Wings over the World (WotW) has managed to scrounge enough resources for technical superiority and aims to end warfare and unite mankind. Their representative (Raymond Massey) comes to the archetypical "Everytown" where he is thrown into prison by the local Boss (Ralph Richardson, in a performance so cartoonish it makes Edward Bromberg's villain in The Mark of Zorro look like the acme of subtlety). When a renegade engineer passes on this news to WotW, they come in their sophisticated bombers and drop a "gas of peace" which puts everyone to sleep, and then take over with their benevolently dictatorial agenda of peaceful scientific progress.

Cut directly a 100 years ahead to a utopian future, where people live in huge white cities with multi-storey screen displays (Here's looking at you, Blade Runner). Poverty and discomfort have been eradicated, and everyone wears togas because apparently the Greco-Roman look is future chic. The scientific head honcho (Massey again, as his own descendant) wants to launch people into space to look at the possibility of landing on and someday inhabiting other planets, and his own daughter volunteers (along with a friend's son). But some (rather curmudgeonly portrayed) people are tired of this ceaseless innovation and want the government to stop with unnecessary, perhaps even blasphemous scientific progress, even if it means physically attacking the launch cannon for the space ship (Yep, the rocket is shot off from a giant barrel). Science vs People debates issue forth while the two sides face off against each other till the rocket is launched off. The film ends with a grandiose monologue on the greatness of scientific progress in which Massey asks his friend (and the audience, one assumes), "All the universe or nothingness? ... Which shall it be? ..."

Wells himself wrote the initial treatment and intended to personally steer the production in a manner he felt his work ought to be presented. But he soon discovered the discrepancy between his imagination and the realities of film production (and according to at least one member of the film crew, just stood around and showed more interest in flirting with the women on set). Many crew members who signed on because they admired Wells' novel were rather surprised to find its well-rounded characters and erudite dialog reduced to caricatures and blatant speeches. William Cameron Menzies whose major claim to fame was as a skilled art director, struggles manfully to bring Wells' reportedly often vague vision to life, and thus provides the film's strongest asset. The scenes showing wide vistas of archetype futuristic urbanscape are often marvellous (even if the optical work is somewhat obvious now), depicting large populations of people dwarfed by gargantuan sleek structures, and the climax featuring a mob attacking the rocket launch cannon is excitingly staged. People who liked or admired Metropolis should definitely check this one out as well.

[sawdustandtinsel]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

You know what? I’ve never seen it either but I’ve heard nothing but good things about it over the years. I don’t know why I’ve avoided it. If it shows up on Netflix or one of my movie channels on cable, I’m watching it.

It's on the Starz app right now.

[MifuneFan]

From March 14-27, the Film Forum will be screening Fassbinder's five-part mini-series Eight Hours Don't Make a Day (Acht Stunden sind kein Tag), and it's being distributed by Janus Films. Arrow UK released their boxset of it in September, so Criterion will likely be releasing this on BD sometime next year.

https://filmforum.org/film/eight-hou...ake-a-day-film

EIGHT HOURS DON’T MAKE A DAY

Wednesday, March 14 - Tuesday, March 27

WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY RAINER WERNER FASSBINDER

The astonishingly prolific Rainer Werner Fassbinder (1945-1982) directed over 40 movies in 15 years. Yet one of his most sprawling works has remained unreleased in the U.S. until now: the epic 1972 working-class miniseries, EIGHT HOURS DON’T MAKE A DAY. It stars many of his favored actors: Hanna Schygulla (THE MARRIAGE OF MARIA BRAUN), Gottfried John (BERLIN ALEXANDERPLATZ), Irm Hermann (THE MERCHANT OF FOUR SEASONS), Kurt Raab (WHY DOES HERR R. RUN AMOK?). It’s a family drama in which the rights of both workers and wives are up for grabs. The vagaries of postwar German capitalism and the changing relationships among men, women, and children fuel the mix through weddings, birthdays, family dinners, workers’ meetings, and romantic trysts. Fassbinder’s people find themselves strangers in a strange new world -- a prescient insight into 21st century anomie.

Check out our gift set for Fassbinder lovers!

GERMANY • 1972/2017
5 FEATURE-LENGTH FILMS THAT WILL BE SCREENED IN 3 PARTS.
IN GERMAN WITH ENGLISH SUBTITLES • JANUS FILMS

[SeanJoyce]

When the hell is Criterion giving me A Face in the Crowd?!?!?!

[UncleBuckWild]

Originally Posted by SeanJoyce

When the hell is Criterion giving me A Face in the Crowd?!?!?!

O' Lord, give this good man what he asks for.

... cause after za Le Samouraï miracle, I'm pretty content with life.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I recently saw the 1936 HG Wells adaptation Things to Come (on the UK Network blu-ray, but I assume the film is equally of interest to the Criterion audience).

[Show spoiler]
This is an odd film, a combination of some wonderful visual wizardry and sense of scale with an awfully stilted and preachy narrative about how socialist-minded scientific progress is the eternal saviour and great equalizer of mankind. It reminds me a fair deal of Fritz Lang's Metropolis, with less of the expressionist imagery.

To summarize the unwieldy narrative: The aftermath of a hypothetical Second World War (an uncomfortably close prediction as history would reveal) brings most of civilization to its needs and nations are reduced almost to tribe-like status, with constant infighting and resource shortage pushing them back to the dark age. Somehow in all this an organization called Wings over the World (WotW) has managed to scrounge enough resources for technical superiority and aims to end warfare and unite mankind. Their representative (Raymond Massey) comes to the archetypical "Everytown" where he is thrown into prison by the local Boss (Ralph Richardson, in a performance so cartoonish it makes Edward Bromberg's villain in The Mark of Zorro look like the acme of subtlety). When a renegade engineer passes on this news to WotW, they come in their sophisticated bombers and drop a "gas of peace" which puts everyone to sleep, and then take over with their benevolently dictatorial agenda of peaceful scientific progress.

Cut directly a 100 years ahead to a utopian future, where people live in huge white cities with multi-storey screen displays (Here's looking at you, Blade Runner). Poverty and discomfort have been eradicated, and everyone wears togas because apparently the Greco-Roman look is future chic. The scientific head honcho (Massey again, as his own descendant) wants to launch people into space to look at the possibility of landing on and someday inhabiting other planets, and his own daughter volunteers (along with a friend's son). But some (rather curmudgeonly portrayed) people are tired of this ceaseless innovation and want the government to stop with unnecessary, perhaps even blasphemous scientific progress, even if it means physically attacking the launch cannon for the space ship (Yep, the rocket is shot off from a giant barrel). Science vs People debates issue forth while the two sides face off against each other till the rocket is launched off. The film ends with a grandiose monologue on the greatness of scientific progress in which Massey asks his friend (and the audience, one assumes), "All the universe or nothingness? ... Which shall it be? ..."

Wells himself wrote the initial treatment and intended to personally steer the production in a manner he felt his work ought to be presented. But he soon discovered the discrepancy between his imagination and the realities of film production (and according to at least one member of the film crew, just stood around and showed more interest in flirting with the women on set). Many crew members who signed on because they admired Wells' novel were rather surprised to find its well-rounded characters and erudite dialog reduced to caricatures and blatant speeches. William Cameron Menzies whose major claim to fame was as a skilled art director, struggles manfully to bring Wells' reportedly often vague vision to life, and thus provides the film's strongest asset. The scenes showing wide vistas of archetype futuristic urbanscape are often marvellous (even if the optical work is somewhat obvious now), depicting large populations of people dwarfed by gargantuan sleek structures, and the climax featuring a mob attacking the rocket launch cannon is excitingly staged. People who liked or admired Metropolis should definitely check this one out as well.

Sci-fi (or speculative fiction in general) is my forte, so this film was a no-brainer for me. Thank you for the fascinating read--I forgot about a lot of things about it.

Last Saturday, I experienced the joy and rapture of opening box after box of movies as I moved into my new house. My parents decided to join in the fray, slicing open boxes and throwing my movies on the shelves with reckless abandon (and a little part of me dies knowing that I have to wait to properly categorize my collection). Out of all the Blu-Rays I own, my dad managed to single out Things to Come and remark "hey, Al has an HG Wells movie!" And so a little part of me feels gratified, and I shall resolve to show this film off to them when I've settled down.

Incidentally, I managed to set up my TV and players without much trouble. First movie I watched in my new home was Le Samourai. Despite the sheer exhaustion I suffered while moving stuff for several straight hours, the movie still captivated me. The new Blu-Ray does have its gaudy parts, but I swear it's mostly the night scenes in the beginning act--most of it looked great to my eyes. Above all, the film holds up for me--that character just exudes coolness, and it made every little encounter and action fascinating. I could watch the guy playing with keys all day. I'm pretty sure I showed this film off to my folks a long time ago, but they wouldn't remember it--Criterion in general is quite outside their range of tastes. But even they didn't fall asleep or lose interest back then.

[tisdivine]

Finally got around to watching Atomic Blonde tonight. Did anyone who’s seen it notice the Stalker billboard? Then they actually are playing the film in the cinema Theron goes into. No lie I got a little excited. I was like Whaaaat No way!

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by tisdivine

Finally got around to watching Atomic Blonde tonight. Did anyone who’s seen it notice the Stalker billboard? Then they actually are playing the film in the cinema Theron goes into. No lie I got a little excited. I was like Whaaaat No way!

I haven't gotten around to seeing it yet -- which is weird, because I love Charlize and looks like a lot of fun -- but that is VERY cool.

I'll definitely look for that.

[Reddington]

Holiday "20% off" sale:

https://www.criterion.com/gift_guide

[PBateman87]

Originally Posted by Reddington

Holiday "20% off" sale:

https://www.criterion.com/gift_guide

Yeah I'm glad I cleaned up during the B&N 50% off sale last month...I need that full 50% to go Criterion shopping, just 20% ain't gonna cut it for me.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by PBateman87

Yeah I'm glad I cleaned up during the B&N 50% off sale last month...I need that full 50% to go Criterion shopping, just 20% ain't gonna cut it for me.

On the plus side, that's 20% off regular prices, not MSRP, so it works out to about 35% off MSRP. Not a bad deal if you you need to pick up some holiday presents.