The Criterion Collection

[greekak229]

Originally Posted by SlickDamian

I'm thinking about buying Antichrist, Modern Times, and Night of the Hunter. What do you think, people who own them?

I love all three of them.

If you're looking for a colorful visually stunning film, with exceptional cinematography, get Antichrist.

The other two are classics, and the restorations on them are amazing. Those two are must-haves, in my opinion. Antichrist, one could do without, because of the material, but it's still a great Blu-ray buy, if you can handle it.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by keldons

He dedicated Reservoir Dogs to Godard, much to Godard's chagrin, as far as I know. I'm with Godard, that movie sucks.

Star Wars is a silly example. You can't compare "depth" in one film vs six (or three decent ones), that is just retarded. What is cool or original or daring about the plot of A New Hope? Nothing. Its a technology film, through and through. Its just a good time. So is Inception. I think they will both be looked upon similarly, or at the least, Inception will end up as a favorite among sci-fi fans a la The Matrix.

Comparing A New Hope to Avatar would work better.

"Watching "Avatar," I felt sort of the same as when I saw "Star Wars" in 1977."

That's great, but I disagree. How many "summer technology films" are actually remembered? You knwo why? The story/characters stink. I'm not comparing one film to six.. im comparing one to one (the original). And again, I say it's remembered because people like the characters. Because without characters people connect to and feel they have relationships with, the story means nothing. And who can u connect with in Inception? Not Ellen Page, not Tom Hardy, not Joseph Gordon Levitt. You know why? because they are severely underwritten and HAVE no character other than delivering exposition. That's why many people think Nolan's films are "cold" and have little heart.. because they are typically only about the technology.

And for the record, I connected with the characters in Avatar 100% more than in Inception.

Not to derail the Criterion thread...

I love The Thin Red Line.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by keldons

What is cool or original or daring about the plot of A New Hope? Nothing. Its a technology film, through and through.

No it's not, it's a grand matinee adventure with some fantastic displays of imagination and charming characters. Inception is serious and realistic with most of the characters being nearly interchangeable suits. I really like Inception, but the movies are nothing alike, and even the stormtroopers from Star Wars have more character than most of the cast from Inception.

[keldons]

Originally Posted by retablo

That's great, but I disagree. How many "summer technology films" are actually remembered? You knwo why? The story/characters stink. I'm not comparing one film to six.. im comparing one to one (the original). And again, I say it's remembered because people like the characters. Because without characters people connect to and feel they have relationships with, the story means nothing. And who can u connect with in Inception? Not Ellen Page, not Tom Hardy, not Joseph Gordon Levitt. You know why? because they are severely underwritten and HAVE no character other than delivering exposition. That's why many people think Nolan's films are "cold" and have little heart.. because they are typically only about the technology.

And for the record, I connected with the characters in Avatar 100% more than in Inception.

I'm not arguing for the depth of the characters in Inception, because yeah, they aren't fleshed out. Cobb is the focal point, and thats all we need to work with to be entertained by the film. Whether you think thats good or not is an entirely different ballgame. On the topic of lasting appeal: I find IMDB to be a good indicator of mainstream taste, and Inception is currently #5 on the top rated films list. Does that verify the film as a good one? No, but it does indicate that the film was very well received and is quite popular in the mainstream, so I doubt people will forget anytime soon. Will it be talked about in 2040? I don't know, but I wouldn't rule it out just because of shallow characterization. I just wouldn't lump the film in with trash like Transformers 2 because of both my opinion on it, and the much more positive public reception Inception has gotten (at least critically).

Originally Posted by Pyoko

No it's not, it's a grand matinee adventure with some fantastic displays of imagination and charming characters. Inception is serious and realistic with most of the characters being nearly interchangeable suits. I really like Inception, but the movies are nothing alike, and even the stormtroopers from Star Wars have more character than most of the cast from Inception.

Star Wars is a film that was notable for being groundbreaking in the realm of special effects and I really don't see how you can argue that. Technology film is an apt description ("The action and special effects are first rate"). The characters are likable, but nothing original, there is literally nothing new about the narrative in the film. The other things are subjective. Yes, Lucas created a universe which was imaginative at the time. You can argue Nolan's work with Inception is imaginative too. Blah blah we could argue BS like this all day.

And to note, I wasn't the one to compare them in the first place. I enjoy them both for the same reason.

And to stay on topic, Night and Fog is brilliant and everyone should buy a DVD copy for $10 from Amazon right now.

[painted_klown]

I hope this isn't considered "trolling" but I am looking to buy a copy of "The Man Who Fell To Earth" Criterion BD and I figured this would be the best place to look.

If you have a copy for sale, please PM me. I can pay with paypal.

Thanks.

-Dave

[jacobsever]

Just watched the movie "XXY" on netflix, and it was an amazing story. Beautifully acted. Unfortunately there is no blu ray release.

I highly doubt Criterion would ever pick this up, but just out of pure curiosity, does anyone know if Criterion has ever obtained rights from the studio Film Movement? They are who released the dvd version of the film.

*edit* after going to film movement's website, i remember being linked to there from this thread before.

[mothman]

I have a question for anybody that has seen or owns Criterion’s edition of Cronos. I was watching Cronos on Netflix earlier via stream and I noticed that it was slow, the film seamed to flicker. I remember seeing this movie a few years ago and don’t remember this happening. So is it just the stream that does this or is the blu-ray edition the same. Or maybe it’s just me.

[mothman]

Thanks I guess it was just the stream. I watched Fish Tank last year when it came out and I didn’t like. It was one of those films that is interesting enough but by the time you finish watching it, you’re wondering why you even bothered.

[jacobsever]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Great point. Ellen Page's character was purely exposition for the Leo/Marion characters' plotline, and the others were basically warm bodies (minds) to allow the multi-layer action.

Has anyone here seen Fish Tank yet? I'm currently checking out Michael Fassbender's filmography and realized he's in that. The trailer sort of reminds me of some of Lynne Ramsay's films crossed with Thirteen.

I love Michael Fassbender. Ever since his performance in Hunger, I've enjoyed watching his films. Eden Lake wasn't too bad either.

[greekak229]

Originally Posted by jacobsever

I love Michael Fassbender. Ever since his performance in Hunger, I've enjoyed watching his films. Eden Lake wasn't too bad either.

He's a great actor. Probably the main reason I'm gonna pick up Fish Tank.

[keldons]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Star Wars isn't insanely popular because people were solely wowed by special effects. Yes, they were stunning compared to what was common at the time. Sure, the characters and plot are retreads, which is exactly why people have so identified with them. It's the embodiment of the epic good vs. evil story with character archetypes that repeatedly pop up in most of human folklore and history. It's only by overdeveloping the story beyond the first film that they mucked it all up.

I think the technical aspects at the time surely helped it gain notoriety, since the story, as you said, is nothing really new. It's not the only reason it caught on, and I realize that. Just like I wouldn't say the visuals in Inception are the only reason people enjoy that film, like retablo seemed to imply by saying the story and characters were shallow. It's a good ride, regardless of the fact that Leo is the only character with any sort of depth.

They are both good films though, and thats the last amount of effort I'll waste on the Star Wars v. Inception issue. It's nearly 3AM so I'm just babbling at this point anyway.

Regarding Night and Fog: You can watch it here if you havent seen it. I think it's a must for any history buffs. Graphic images warning, if anyone clicking is uninitiated. $10 for an (in my opinion) historically essential film with a few extras and some essays seems is a steal for me, even if the film is only 31 minutes.

Also Fish Tank is redeemed by Fassbender, but it's not a very strong film. Think of a grittier version of An Education except equally as lame with an actress that isnt hot like Carey Mulligan. It's a bummer that Criterion couldn't fill that IFC spot with a loaded edition of Enter the Void instead of Fish Tank. ETV has me worried since its being handled by the same company that thought it was a good idea to put the whole Red Riding Trilogy on one disc.

[aggienader08]

Well folks! I just finished watching Cronos and I gotta say I liked it quite a bit. Most of you know, but it's currently available for instant stream on Netflix. If you haven't seen it yet I'd recommend finding the time to watch it. It's really interesting to see how Toro's work has evolved since then, not to mention Ron Perlman's acting...

A couple of notes/questions to think about:

How is it that foreign actors seem so much better in their lead roles? Are foreign viewers wondering the same thing? Of course this is pure speculation from an American standpoint. Perlman was so lame in this film. He was highly encouraged not to take this role, but he did anyway. I wonder how it would have turned out if someone else had filled his role?

Also, was it just me (and possibly my background working for a major symphony orchestra), or was the music poorly composed? with several awkwardly placed instrumentations and variations not native to the film's setting? No wonder no information is available regarding Javier Alvarez, because he's flat out terrible. At times it was just mediocre at best, but other times it was flat out rancid. I understand that Toro didn't have the finances to hire a major composer, but it seems like they could have found somebody better if they'd recruited from a university or something.

Those were the only aspects that really removed me from the film, because otherwise I thought this was a brilliant film. This will definitely be added to my Christmas wishlist as I will definitely be viewing this one multiple times. Now bring on Devil's Backbone Criterion!

[rkish]

Originally Posted by mothman

I have a question for anybody that has seen or owns Criterion’s edition of Cronos. I was watching Cronos on Netflix earlier via stream and I noticed that it was slow, the film seamed to flicker. I remember seeing this movie a few years ago and don’t remember this happening. So is it just the stream that does this or is the blu-ray edition the same. Or maybe it’s just me.

I did the same thing mothman...and noticed the very same thing.

You'd need to get the feedback from those that actually bought the BD...but my gut tells me, that it was a part of the streaming process that "slowed it up" a bit.

If you remember from the very beginning...the "revolving C" for Criterion that you see on all BD releases, also seemed to be slowed down as well. Even if the film were supposed to look that way, I doubt they would have done the same with Criterion's logo.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Illy Scorsese

You sound like an idiot right now... lol

But you seem to be having fun doing so, so do whatever gets your kicks.

I don't think that he is...

Two years ago you could not make a single negative comments about The Dark Knight anywhere. If you dared doing it you were being shut down faster then the Japanese Zero's at the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot in WWII.

Now it's been replace by Avatar & Inception. If you dare make a negative comment you are nothing but a hater. I promise you that in 18 months these two movies will have been forgotten for the lastest flavor of the moment.

[larry47591]

Originally Posted by Ray_Rogers

EDIT: Is it at all true or possible Criterion might release THE GAME? Would be nice if they ported the features from the Laserdisc AND gave it even more. Possibly a 2-Disc release? But how many Criterion titles on Blu-ray actually have received the 2-Disc treatment barring The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Seven Samurai?

I think you will hear about the game this week to be release with social network. Which may or may not be a criterion release.

[greekak229]

Maybe The Game will be a March release. Let's hope.

[csdot]

my dad asked for 49th Parallel for xmas so i jumped on the chance to expose him to the greatness that is the Criterion Collection.
i think hell be impressed.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by larry47591

I think you will hear about the game this week to be release with social network. Which may or may not be a criterion release.

The Game was said to be in April.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

I don't think that he is...

Two years ago you could not make a single negative comments about The Dark Knight anywhere. If you dared doing it you were being shut down faster then the Japanese Zero's at the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot in WWII.

Now it's been replace by Avatar & Inception. If you dare make a negative comment you are nothing but a hater. I promise you that in 18 months these two movies will have been forgotten for the lastest flavor of the moment.

Thanks.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

I don't think that he is...

Two years ago you could not make a single negative comments about The Dark Knight anywhere. If you dared doing it you were being shut down faster then the Japanese Zero's at the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot in WWII.

Now it's been replace by Avatar & Inception. If you dare make a negative comment you are nothing but a hater. I promise you that in 18 months these two movies will have been forgotten for the lastest flavor of the moment.

What does that have to do with the actual quality of the films though? If you want to say that the general consciousness of the mainstream is fickle as they come, then sure I'll agree with you. But just as something is not necessarily good or bad because the mainstream ignored it, something is also not necessarily good or bad because the mainstream was obsessed with it for a brief period.

Sure, Inception and the like will be mostly forgotten in a few years, but what does that matter? That will happen with ANY movie - no public fervor is sustainable long-term save a few crazy exceptions (and I'd argue that those exceptions, like Star Wars, are continually refueled by new expansions - books, videogames, tv shows, etc.). Is being popular and then losing the attention somehow worse than never being popular at all? Does that period of popularity forever ruin the film's capability of being discussed or appreciated at any real level?