The Criterion Collection

[DaBargainHunta]

Originally Posted by SuperFlyHighGuy

Sorry, no witnesses allowed.

What?

[SonnybytheSea]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I have a feeling Criterion dropped it due to all the controversy that surrounded the title in recent years. They'd probably never admit as much. It would no doubt have been a huge seller for them, so there's little reason for them to have cancelled their release.. Many people, including Ringwald herself have spoken out about some of the negative aspects of the film in light of today's culture.

Wouldn't it be more WOKE to release it with a special feature where everyone acknowledged the problematic aspects of the film in today's culture, then to pass it off to another label?

Also up until ten years ago Molly Ringwald was talking about a sequel to Sixteen Candles, so out of all her Hughes collaborations it's the one she liked the most!!

[FragnitoM]

Originally Posted by SonnybytheSea

Wouldn't it be more WOKE to release it with a special feature where everyone acknowledged the problematic aspects of the film in today's culture, then to pass it off to another label?

Also up until ten years ago Molly Ringwald was talking about a sequel to Sixteen Candles, so out of all her Hughes collaborations it's the one she liked the most!!

If they released Swing Time, they could have released 16 Candles... I really don’t think most people who buy criterion would have be that triggered by a release

[SonnybytheSea]

Originally Posted by FragnitoM

If they released Swing Time, they could have released 16 Candles... I really don’t think most people who buy criterion would have be that triggered by a release

That's my point! if CC was worried about the racist and sexist issues with the film, then acknowledge this stuff on the disc. Talk about the positive and negative aspects of the film and point out that it was made during a different time.

Some of the same issues in this film can be found in plenty of other films of the 80s and 90s including the highly successful and beloved Back to the Future.....

[Al3xanderdelag]

Reminder this is the same company that released Sweet Movie but refuses to release Sixteen Candles because of outdated beliefs. Imo it's probably not because of this but there may have been an issue with any of the rights or maybe Arrow offered more money

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

Do you have a link to the trade thread?

Maybe it's as simple as he's now a Criterion Channel subscriber, which really is an awesome, convenient, and relatively inexpensive way to see tons of fantastic movies.

In the past week alone, I've watched Black Jack and Kes because they're expiring tonight (the latter is a masterpiece) and the short film Artun (which told a very complete and effective story in only 21 minutes).

Physical media bro!

...you’re either with us or you’re against us!!!!

[Show spoiler]

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I’d just like to call attention to the fact that Scottie is currently selling a massive selection of titles, including the Bergman set, on the Criterion trade thread.

What does it mean?

Has he abandoned the cause?

Will he invest the money in his newfound love of Arrow Films?

I don’t trust him to lead us anymore.

I don’t think he’s one of us.

...I move that we consider articles of moderator impeachment.

I'm just sick of owning movies I won't ever watch again.

I'm happy watching films like The Big Sleep and Lost in Translation time and time again. But I've grown exhausted with a lot of movies. The Piano Teacher and Seven Samurai, for example, are excellent and I've seen them two or three times, but I am content with not seeing them again.

I'll always continue to be a physical media supporter.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Scottie

...and Seven Samurai, for example, are excellent and I've seen them two or three times, but I am content with not seeing them again.

I've seen it more than a dozen times over the years (first was sometime in the 90's on TV, and twice on a cinema screen) and yet you could tell me at nearly any moment, "Hey, let's watch Seven Samurai" and I'd be "Yeah, cool".

[StarDestroyer52]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I've seen it more than a dozen times over the years (first was sometime in the 90's on TV, and twice on a cinema screen) and yet you could tell me at nearly any moment, "Hey, let's watch Seven Samurai" and I'd be "Yeah, cool".

Yeah, I am usually good for two viewings a year of Seven Samurai. I will never get tired of watching it.

[theater dreamer]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

DaBargainHunta Smith also has that internal dialogue with himself.

As well as a tendency to refer to himself in the third person, it seems. “George likes spicy chicken.”


On to a different topic, and the notion Criterion may be wanting to avoid the possible controversy that would come with a release of Sixteen Candles. I present exhibit A:



The cover of Spike Lee’s latest entrant to the Criterion Collection is likely to wake up the woke crowd, no matter how deep their slumber.

I know that many, if not most, film aficionados will see that cover, and if they’ve not seen the movie, and don’t understand the context, they’lll inquire as to why they’re staring at a man in blackface. A quick Google search for a synopsis will shed a bit of light on the reason for said cover presentation. Others, still, will see it’s a Spike Lee film, and intuitively understand that Lee uses parody, social satire and comedy as weapons.

Then there are those who will simply overreact, and take to social media to express their indignation on behalf of others.

I respect the opinion shared by those that have posted, thus far. And you all may be right. But Criterion doesn’t strike me as a company that shrinks from possible backlash.

I know my opinion may ultimately be unpopular, but I’m getting pretty fed up with all the social justice warriors running amok on social media. There are those that see something distasteful, and actively engage in efforts to change how we think; they seek to improve the world around them. These people I applaud. These are the kind of people that will judge something while remaining mindful of the context of the time during which it was produced. But there are so many more people that just want to boycott, piss and moan; they never lift a finger to address the root cause, or try to make things better. They don’t engage in constructive dialogue. They just need their contempt to be seen.

If I made up a list of films that were “socially acceptable”, and had to toss out the rest, my collection would wither away. Can’t watch a Roman Polanski film. Woody Allen’s filmography is forbidden, and the director persona non grata. What’s this? A movie produced by Harvey Weinstein, starring Kevin Spacey? Holy shit, burn it! But The Matrix trilogy? “Ooh, we love Keanu Reeves. He’s so respectful.”

This is a form of historical revisionism, and it’s sickening. Ten years ago, I could say, “hey, I liked American Beauty and The Usual Suspects. Now, it’s as if mentioning the movies, let alone watching them, makes me a misogynist. If it’s proven Spacey did the things he was accused of, throw his ass in jail, and toss away the key. I’m going to still watch his movies, and not feel the slightest pang of guilt for doing so.

[FragnitoM]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

I know my opinion may ultimately be unpopular, but I’m getting pretty fed up with all the social justice warriors running amok on social media.

The online ones I agree with you. Not all people on social media are like this, but it gives social justice a bad name when there are actually real people doing important things in real life trying to raise awareness and fight injustice, not just going online and being outraged about superficial things for likes.

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by malakaheso

re:Fellini. I'm more interested in seeing restored versions of films like And The Ship Sails On than seeing another transfer of La Strada or La Dolce Vita.

Hopefully the new restorations will draw more attention to his post-Amarcord work.

To be fair, La Strada has been treated pretty poorly in the blu-ray era.

[FragnitoM]

Originally Posted by mande2013

To be fair, La Strada has been treated pretty poorly in the blu-ray era.

The late fellini I’m really hoping for is ginger and fred. The dvd is so bad I think it would look stunning with a great transfer on bluray

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by SonnybytheSea

Wouldn't it be more WOKE to release it with a special feature where everyone acknowledged the problematic aspects of the film in today's culture, then to pass it off to another label?

Also up until ten years ago Molly Ringwald was talking about a sequel to Sixteen Candles, so out of all her Hughes collaborations it's the one she liked the most!!

As far as i know Criterion wanted to release it. It wasn't their choice for it to go elsewhere.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

As far as i know Criterion wanted to release it. It wasn't their choice for it to go elsewhere.

It possibly was their choice.

[koberulz]

shadedpain is suggesting they have inside information, though, so "possibly" isn't hugely relevant. Worth noting shadedpain called this two and a half years ago.

[FragnitoM]

Only going by how many people have the Criterion Breakfast Club in their collections compared to other spine numbers on here, I don’t think it was a sales concern... My library even has a few copies even though they already had the original bluray. It was probably a healthy seller

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by FragnitoM

The late fellini I’m really hoping for is ginger and fred.

Me too. A very sweet and underrated film. Masina and Mastroianni are pure joy to watch.

[FragnitoM]

Was sad not getting a clue yesterday. I hope they decide to keep doing it with another artist eventually

[Hellspawn28]

I personally wanted Criterion to pick up Forest of Love from Netflix. I love that movie and it's a shame most people didn't watch it.