The Criterion Collection

[Hendershot737]

The Killing only $25.99 pre-order. Not too shabby.

[greekak229]

Originally Posted by Hendershot737

The Killing only $25.99 pre-order. Not too shabby.

For two movies, I agree.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by retablo

That was Inception's major flaw, other than the fact that it had zero imagination (you're in dreams and the ONLY thing he can come up with is James Bond car chases and shoot outs? C'mon, in dreams you can do ANYTHING.).

The problem with doing ANYTHING is that whatever you do do, it never matches what dreams are to an individual. If he made the dream worlds surreal, people would say "that's too weird", or "my dreams are nothing like that"

IMO he took exactly the right approach...not making the dream worlds too specific, leaving them somewhat generic and fuzzy around the edges. I like that there's not a lot of detail, and that there aren't many other people in them...and the snow level to me seems like an amalgam of memories, like of James Bond movies, and Where Eagles Dare... which is what dreams often are, fuzzy constructions of events and old memories.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by Ray_Rogers

I agree with these.



I don't give a shit about John Wayne since to me studios are focusing way too much on him and the Paramount releases are focusing way too much on him and not using the original poster art. He starred with other actors in those films and wasn't John Wayne-centric. These default to zero buys from me. The only John Wayne films I'd ever own are if there's a far superior actor in them i.e. Robert Montgomery, Kirk Douglas, Robert Mitchum et. al. Otherwise I'll pass.

Yes my wishlist for films I'd own on Blu-ray, especially Criterion, is vast and includes varous other titles not even on Blu-ray yet.

You didn't read my other posts, as Wayne was used as an example of what the studios are doing.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Does anyone have a theory as to why many of Nolan's films feature a main female character that is

[Show spoiler]either dead at the beginning of the film or dead by the end of it

?

Or exist solely to cause pain to the male protagonists.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Traffic. The Royal Tenenbaums. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Che.

Joe, Button wasn't a CC film it was Paramounts, regardless of the spin, and the others were not megahits like your Armageddon and Robocop were. I don't even think Che was nominated for any Oscars, so not a hit in the general publics eyes either. My point is that Criterion has changed their business model due to the studios changing theirs over the years. They are not the same company, in terms of output, as they were in the laserdisc and early dvd days. The only consistency over the years has been the quality factor which has made people come back to them.

[popeflick]

Originally Posted by retablo

The problem I have with Nolan, I already stated... his films have ZERO heart and soul. They are all cold when it comes to emotions.. Everyone acts rigid in stiff in EVERY one of his films. He tried making a relationship the core of Inception, but you can't have a relationship in films without actually showing the characters in scenes together. That was Inception's major flaw, other than the fact that it had zero imagination (you're in dreams and the ONLY thing he can come up with is James Bond car chases and shoot outs? C'mon, in dreams you can do ANYTHING.).

I'd be fine with the no heart and soul, if he could just do action well enough to fight out of a wet paper bag. I know Batman fights at night, but the fight scene shots are never anything more than whipping cape, flying gloved fist and some dude going flying. No sense of geography at all. Can't see half of what happens. in TDK, when he's fighting toward that boss in the nightclub it's a joke of a scene for a film with that budget. Inception suffered from it as well.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

True, they were not major hits in the Armageddon sense, but they were first-run releases by high-profile Hollywood directors. But I take your point. At least give me credit for not listing The Life Aquatic.

But since BB is directed by Fincher, and is in many ways a "gateway" title for people otherwise unfamiliar with Criterions, it's going to get lumped into discussion about contemporary American titles in the collection whether people consider it a "true" Criterion or not.



That is a very interesting observation. Criterion helped birth the DVD market, the major studios took advantage of its potential, and Criterion's focus went to arthouse and non-mainstream titles as access to big studio titles dried up. I'll buy that.

Joe, that is pretty much my point. It's unfortunate, because there are many catalog releases that Criterion had or could make special, Spartacus comes to mind, that have had an embarrassing entrance into the world of blu-ray. This I believe is due to the thing that makes the world-go-round, money...

Too bad Universal and Warner have had too many strikes against them to stay in the ballpark. Warner thinks that if it has 'digibook' status that it is a 'refined' release. Again, comparing themselves to the originators of quality home video, but not giving the general public the quality it deserves.

I am fine with what Criterion is putting out now, as that is their niche. People that are into the classics will spend their money with Criterion, as they know they are getting quality. The company can now be called 'arthouse' or whatever is a buzz term these days. The bottom line is that they are releasing films that no one is and generally these films are of a better overall quality than most of the junk the major studios are putting out. Frankly, no one will give a shit about Inception, Dark Knight or Benjamin Button 20 years from now, but releases like Kes, Solaris and Diabolique will stand the test of time for film lovers. These are the building blocks for most of the junk you see these days put out by the 'studios'.....

[popeflick]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

I think that's intentional. I actually thought the nightclub scene was great. One night he's base-jumping off a skyscraper in Hong Kong, the next he's busting heads in the club. But then I find most movie fight scenes OVER-choreographed, overlong and boring.

I'm not knocking his concepts, just his fight scene execution. And despite those flaws I find both his Batman films terrific.

[TJS_Blu]

Someone (a BR-member who's BR-ID I cannot recall) posted over on the Criterion forum that Criterion Cast had indicated that Umbrellas of Cherbourg was probably going to be coming to the collection. I looked around and couldn't find anything. Anyone else see this?

[Rizor]

Originally Posted by TJS_Blu

Someone (a BR-member who's BR-ID I cannot recall) posted over on the Criterion forum that Criterion Cast had indicated that Umbrellas of Cherbourg was probably going to be coming to the collection. I looked around and couldn't find anything. Anyone else see this?

I remember seeing it in one of their monthly "we guess the titles being announced" features maybe last month. I looked at their website and perhaps they delete them after the titles are actually revealed?

[GunRanger]

Originally Posted by retablo

The problem I have with Nolan, I already stated... his films have ZERO heart and soul. They are all cold when it comes to emotions.. Everyone acts rigid in stiff in EVERY one of his films. He tried making a relationship the core of Inception, but you can't have a relationship in films without actually showing the characters in scenes together. That was Inception's major flaw, other than the fact that it had zero imagination (you're in dreams and the ONLY thing he can come up with is James Bond car chases and shoot outs? C'mon, in dreams you can do ANYTHING.).

They had several scenes together, and they were quite emotional. I liked the fact he stuck to the heist formula more though. The dreams weren't meant to be weird and crazy as they said the weirder things become the more the target becomes aware.

Originally Posted by JLTucker

Or exist solely to cause pain to the male protagonists.

Well film noir and the notion of the "femme-fatale" are big influences on him and is in his work. That's not to say there aren't examples of women who are the moral center of the films: Swank in Insomnia and Rachel in the Batmans.

Originally Posted by popeflick

I'm not knocking his concepts, just his fight scene execution. And despite those flaws I find both his Batman films terrific.

I agree on Begins, as it was too fast and too shaky. He improved with TDK though, and the hallway fight in Inception was fantastic.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by TJS_Blu

Someone (a BR-member who's BR-ID I cannot recall) posted over on the Criterion forum that Criterion Cast had indicated that Umbrellas of Cherbourg was probably going to be coming to the collection. I looked around and couldn't find anything. Anyone else see this?

It was just a guess by Ryan of CriterionCast. He probs knows a reason why he would guess that, but a guess none the less. I hope it is true though.

[bugsy_pal]

Originally Posted by Ray_Rogers

Only damn reason I want Criterion to release THE GAME on Blu-ray is so I don't have to import the UK Special Edition DVD which I've been procrastinating about since I do want the best released version on the best current format possible.

"The Game" is available on bluray in Australia, and I've seen it dirt cheap for about $10. Something to consider...

[Icemouth]

Originally Posted by Banned User

I don't understand the Nolan hate. He makes a lot of movies that are different then the typical genre movies that flood the box office. If anything I commend him for taking the chances he does. Memento, Inception and The Prestige were all good and very imaginative films with excellent casting and directing. Also may I add his direction of Insomnia was superb.
I get the feeling that hating Nolan is just the in thing right now and usually it just comes off sounding like some overly critical movie reviewer. Then again I've always been a 'glass half full' person. I try to find what I like in a movie and not overly condemn what I don't. I will critique things I don't like in a movie, but usually find something to like about most movies.

While I agree the film's plot was full of holes. Heath gave a amazing performance of a character that audiences love. I don't think his death had any real impact on the popularity of the film. It has enough elements that are good enough to stand on its own. Plot wasn't one of them. My biggest disappointment about Heath's death is how it hurt Terry Gilliam's film so badly.

Memento was cool and so was Prestige but...Prestige was a really, really cheesy movie. Also your Dark Knight comment is interesting seeing how Heath did NOT play the character at all, which is the main criticism from most Batman fans. There was 0 Joker in it, at all. Plus all the plotholes (which seems to be a problem for nolan as they exist in Memento and Prestige as well). It really wasn't that good. And, I mean, the "audience" thinks Transformers is the best series ever so....

[GunRanger]

The fanboys have criticized his look from the get go. They're pretty much worthless and refuse to accept this is/was a different take on the universe. He nailed the tone of the character, and mixed humor with the sadism as well as you can.

I would like to hear the plot holes.

[Benchman]

Originally Posted by Icemouth

Memento was cool and so was Prestige but...Prestige was a really, really cheesy movie. Also your Dark Knight comment is interesting seeing how Heath did NOT play the character at all, which is the main criticism from most Batman fans. There was 0 Joker in it, at all. Plus all the plotholes (which seems to be a problem for nolan as they exist in Memento and Prestige as well). It really wasn't that good. And, I mean, the "audience" thinks Transformers is the best series ever so....

I don't think a lot of the "audience" that like The Dark Knight like Transformers also. Personally I love the Dark Knight because it was unlike any "comic book" movie ever made. It was dark and atmospheric and had great characters. I honestly don't think Ledger's death added anything to his performance, it's simply one of the best portrayals of a villain ever. Why does everyone here like to hate on great directors? Just because he's popular doesn't mean Nolan isn't one of the best filmmakers working today.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by BennyBlu

Why does everyone here like to hate on great directors?

Maybe because that is an opinion (what is great), and everyone has an opinion (which directors are great), hence why you think they "hate" on him (being they obviously don't think he is great). Atleast that is what I see going on.

It's also kind of like while your in 6th grade you think 6th grade Math is the hardest around, until your in 12th grade and look back at that simple 6th grade math. When you come to conclusions about something and mixing facts with opinions without branching out and seeing eveything else, you'll never know what is out there only that "hard" 6th grade math. Does that make sense (oh and btw, I was great at Math, so I didn't have that problem.)?

[Benchman]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

Maybe because that is an opinion (what is great), and everyone has an opinion (which directors are great), hence why you think they "hate" on him (being they obviously don't think he is great). Atleast that is what I see going on.

It's also kind of like while your in 6th grade you think 6th grade Math is the hardest around, until your in 12th grade and look back at that simple 6th grade math. When you come to conclusions about something and mixing facts with opinions without branching out and seeing eveything else, you'll never know what is out there only that "hard" 6th grade math. Does that make sense?

I see what your saying but it just seems like a trend here to say "oh Fincher is so overrated" and "Nolan really isn't as good as everyone thinks" but they usually don't back up their opinion, they just agree to fit in. I'm all for having an opinion but I just like to get some insight on way they say that

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by BennyBlu

I see what your saying but it just seems like a trend here to say "oh Fincher is so overrated" and "Nolan really isn't as good as everyone thinks" but they usually don't back up their opinion, they just agree to fit in. I'm all for having an opinion but I just like to get some insight on way they say that

I understand.