The Criterion Collection

[Narcissus]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

I'm not disagreeing with you there, as I'm a librarian and I'm against censorship. I guess I just expect more respect and professionalism from people when they debate stuff in this thread, as opposed to the other threads on this board. There's a difference in stating that you don't agree with someone's taste in films from calling that person an insane idiot because they don't agree with your taste in films. That's why the Harold and Maude thread ended up getting out of hand with the constant trolling posts from one user. People tend to get defensive, and where this is the internet, initial tone of the poster is hard to determine. A lot of people also think it's a free-for-all, and that they can say whatever they want to say. That was the point of my comment, and I feel I didn't take it out of context.

totally agree. and you are right, when did disagreeing with another persons point of view begin meaning that i hate you and want you dead? WTF????

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

It's like my friend who hates Polanski because of the casting couch issue, or the issues going on in the Lars Von Trier thread. Disregard the artist totally because you don't agree with something. That's silly.

The Antichrist thread is hilarious.
Re Polanski, kind of like the people who shun Landis due to Twilight Zone: The Movie. did they make mistakes? sure. disregard the art? Hell No.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Narcissus

totally agree. and you are right, when did disagreeing with another persons point of view begin meaning that i hate you and want you dead? WTF????



The Antichrist thread is hilarious.
Re Polanski, kind of like the people who shun Landis due to Twilight Zone: The Movie. did they make mistakes? sure. disregard the art? Hell No.

Exactly. That stuff's meant for /b/. It's also a bit like some of the derogatory comments towards Tiny Furniture: the director slept to get her film made, she bashes classic films, she's fant and ugly, etc. It's fine to dislike Tiny Furniture, but I do think that the attacks such as this are not constructive.

I posted once in the Antichrist thread, with some comments Von Trier has made, and didn't say whether I thought he was misogynistic one way or the other, just that he had a pretty messed up life, and has made some "interesting" comments. I was told that he makes shit up and to not pay any attention to what he says. That was from a fan.

I found Von Trier's comments to be controversial (calling your mom a slut and claiming he's a Nazi, maybe done as a joke, but I can understand why people would take them the wrong way), yet I'm still interested in seeing his films (just not Antichrist because of the

[Show spoiler]snippy snippy bits

).

It's kinda funny too, a lot of people think Tiny Furniture shouldn't get a CC release, and some have even gone as far to say that it should have never been made in the first place. Why is it acceptable to make those comments about Dunham, as opposed to making the same comments about Von Trier in the other thread? It's essentially the same argument, "I don't like something, therefore no one else should have the opportunity to decide whether or not they like it!", only the reason for dislike is different, i.e. Von Trier is a misogynistic PoS, while Dunham's just fat, stupid, and her movie sucks.

There's some food for thought for you.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

I find it hard to believe anyone who has done the Pokemon bit with Criterion Blu-rays to this point is suddenly going to draw the line at Tiny Furniture or Hollis Frampton. They are bound to have already found something they disliked by now! What's another $40 at the next B&N sale to feed the monkey?!

Also, I wonder how many of you missed ROCK's mentioning he actually intends to buy the Frampton set?

Wasn't that essentially what I said? They're waiting for the sale? Another poster said he was seriously rethinking the Pokemon approach because of Tiny Furniture, and Harold and Maude, because he/she hates those films with a burning passion.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by BohemianGraham

Link? I'm curious as to which films she's dumping on. It's like my friend who hates Polanski because of the casting couch issue, or the issues going on in the Lars Von Trier thread. Disregard the artist totally because you don't agree with something. That's silly.

Her take on Nick Ray:

http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-...afest-edition/

Dunham: For me, forgetting that I'm watching people act is such a thrilling sensation. That's what I look for when watching movies. . . . I'm a total movie geek, but I can't get into movies like Nicholas Ray's. I'll go with my friends and they'll say, "Bigger Than Life—that was incredible." And I was so distracted the entire time by watching James Mason act in that fashion.

Her blog:

http://www.hammertonail.com/author/lena-dunham/

From the Red Riding review:

David Thomson opens an essay on the Red Riding trilogy by stating: “Red Riding is better than The Godfather.” I’m not sure if this is true, because I’ve never seen The Godfather. According to every guy I’ve ever dated, this renders me ineligible for making films or even discussing them. But I know myself, for better or worse, and mafia narratives (be they tragic, comic, starring a Pacino, a De Niro, or even my beloved Hugh Grant) leave me utterly cold. I guess I’m generally nonplussed by a complex web of crime. For instance, I cannot get into The Wire and refuse to be sorry, or to “hang on until season two.”

[rock, stone]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Her take on Nick Ray:

http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-...afest-edition/

Dunham: For me, forgetting that I'm watching people act is such a thrilling sensation. That's what I look for when watching movies. . . . I'm a total movie geek, but I can't get into movies like Nicholas Ray's. I'll go with my friends and they'll say, "Bigger Than Life—that was incredible." And I was so distracted the entire time by watching James Mason act in that fashion.

Her blog:

http://www.hammertonail.com/author/lena-dunham/

From the Red Riding review:

David Thomson opens an essay on the Red Riding trilogy by stating: “Red Riding is better than The Godfather.” I’m not sure if this is true, because I’ve never seen The Godfather. According to every guy I’ve ever dated, this renders me ineligible for making films or even discussing them. But I know myself, for better or worse, and mafia narratives (be they tragic, comic, starring a Pacino, a De Niro, or even my beloved Hugh Grant) leave me utterly cold. I guess I’m generally nonplussed by a complex web of crime. For instance, I cannot get into The Wire and refuse to be sorry, or to “hang on until season two.”

She sounds no more ridiculous than just about every other poster in this thread. Ignore her. That is what I do with Greg Araki. It is pretty easy.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

I was musing about the last bit of your comment because I find it laughable people might suddenly be having a crisis some 150+ titles in (or whatever it is). A wise man who isn't Nigel Tufnel once said "If you write a comedy bit, there's going to be some feces in there." It's a universal truth. So collect 'em all or get off the pot.

(Personally I just find it funny that Lena Dunham has managed to unravel so many people's hopes and dreams for the Criterion Collection. Antichrist? Check. House? So random! Love it! Salo? Hit me baby one more time! Tiny Furniture? Ohhhhhhhh nooooooooooo make it stopppppppppppppppppp!!!!!!!!!!)

Exactly, but some people are obviously reacting that way, Tiny Furniture is apparently far worse than Salo, Antichrist, In the Realm of the Senses, Hitler, Stalin, and Scientology combined. Tiny Furniture also apparently killed Baby Jesus, was responsible for the Sinking of the Lusitania (for years people thought it was Peter Tork as he took credit for it ), and was the root cause of the Black Plague and the extintion of the dinosaurs.

Originally Posted by rock, stone

She sounds no more ridiculous than just about every other poster in this thread. Ignore her. That is what I do with Greg Araki. It is pretty easy.

Yep, check out her thoughts on everyone's "darling," Wes Anderson: http://www.hammertonail.com/reviews/...t-film-review/

So she likes films that people don't, and hates films that people do. I loved Bigger than Life, because James Mason was not acting like how most people expect James Mason to act. She didn't, no big deal. She doesn't like The Godfather trilogy because it doesn't resonate with her, yet that's a crime against humanity. Why?

As you said, she's no more ridiculous than anyone on this board.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by rock, stone

She sounds no more ridiculous than just about every other poster in this thread. Ignore her. That is what I do with Greg Araki. It is pretty easy.

But she seems so smart using a word like nonplussed!

[Banned User]

Originally Posted by joie

No. My opinion of Army of Shadows is simply the emperor-has-no-clothes view. Don't worry ... I'll unload my copy on Amazon's trade-in.

This is not directed at you, but god I hate the 'Emperor has no clothes' expression!!!! If you read any reviews online in places like Amazon or IMDB you always find a ton of people who can't just say ' I don't like' a movie because A & B etc. Instead they make the 'emperor has no clothes' argument. Basically saying everyone else's opinion of the film is wrong and people only say they liked a film out fear of not fitting in with the group think.

Originally Posted by vader4

Hey anyone with expertise on this movie please comment. I watched Black Moon the other day with an open mind but found that I really didn't understand it. I tend to like odd movies but I feel like I missed something on this one
If anybody has any thoughts on it please share...

There is a lot you can read into the film, but it is extremely hard to get a good handle on it. I will say the cinematography and color usage are suburb though. Most people see the film as a coming of age film for the main character, but there is a lot more going on. Strange movie indeed.

[*DrStrangelove*]

For the record, I totally admire Dunham for writing, starring, directing, and put herself out there (literally). I wish I could do something like that. I could only dream of ever being able to make my own film. And for that alone, my hats off to Dunham. However, I feel like this film would have been fine with just a DVD release. I do not see the need for a blu ray, let alone a Criterion bluray. This is a dull film. Filled with boring, annoying characters. There is noone likable in this film. Nothing happens in this film. By the end of the film the characters are still annoying.

That said, I still enjoyed it more than watching a lemon for 5 min

[GilliamsBrazil]

Originally Posted by ROclockCK

BTW, are there any other not-yet-OOP Criterion titles owned by Studio Canal? I would consider their continuing availability in the collection to be questionable.

There are a few--in addition the the ones already mentioned, there's Big Deal on Madonna Street, Hopscotch, The Proud Valley, Native Land and Le cercle rouge.

[rock, stone]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

But she seems so smart using a word like nonplussed!

I have officially reversed my position.

BURN THE WITCH!!

[slimdude]

What is so special about Criterion releases anyway, that everybody is falling head over heels over, besides the tons of extra features they suppose to have? Do Criterion movies have exceptional A/V quality, than normal blu-ray releases? I've never bought one because there is not one Criterion blu-ray, nor DVD title that interests me.

[zeroman987]

I think my main problem with the filmmaker and how she presents her movie in trailers and teasers is her seeming complete lack of perspective.

I feel like every young adult should be put into a situation which gives them a trial by fire. I worked in a welfare office for a little over a year after college and before going to professional school (and I am I going through another trial by fire right now!). Most of my friends did volunteer work, joined the Peace Corps or did some sort of physically demanding "Regular Joe" work (one friend worked in a paper mill and another did construction). This type of activity can be rewarding for any person and provides them with more perspective on their life. I will make a value judgment here and say that this is more valuable to the individual and society as a whole than getting a part time job at a bar and raising money (lets not kid ourselves, chances are that she asked her friends and family for money) to make a movie about upper middle class experiences.

Some people (people in her exact position with a lack of self-awareness) might enjoy what the filmmaker presents as a naive and narcissistic type of film. Just by the trailer for the film, it is clear that she lacks any perspective on her life. These mundane events in her life carry the weight of real burdens. If she had done a physically demanding job, helped the disabled, joined the Peace Corps or worked in a welfare office, she would understand that there are people in the world that have real, actual problems. Their problems aren't necessarily their relationships (although, their actual problems do affect their relationships), there problems include: not having enough money food or rent, dying from disease, not being educated, etc... In essence, their problems result from their inability to satisfy their basic human needs. If the movie has a scene where she starts doing volunteer work of ANY kind (picking up litter, assisting the disabled, etc...) I will get behind this movie. Those are worthwhile activities and a valid response to being depressed because you are upper-middle class. Making a silly movie about how you can't find a real job after college because you live in la-la land is not a valid response and only reinforces your foolish behavior.

(I know this sounds judgmental and harsh. However, I feel like at one point I was like her - my main concern were my relationships with the opposite sex and "finding who I was." However, my money and my mouth are in the same place - I practice what I preach).

[rock, stone]

Originally Posted by zeroman987

I think my main problem with the filmmaker and how she presents her movie in trailers and teasers is her seeming complete lack of perspective.

I feel like every young adult should be put into a situation which gives them a trial by fire. I worked in a welfare office for a little over a year after college and before going to professional school (and I am I going through another trial by fire right now!). Most of my friends did volunteer work, joined the Peace Corps or did some sort of physically demanding "Regular Joe" work (one friend worked in a paper mill and another did construction). This type of activity can be rewarding for any person and provides them with more perspective on their life. I will make a value judgment here and say that this is more valuable to the individual and society as a whole than getting a part time job at a bar and raising money (lets not kid ourselves, chances are that she asked her friends and family for money) to make a movie about upper middle class experiences.

Some people (people in her exact position with a lack of self-awareness) might enjoy what the filmmaker presents as a naive and narcissistic type of film. Just by the trailer for the film, it is clear that she lacks any perspective on her life. These mundane events in her life carry the weight of real burdens. If she had done a physically demanding job, helped the disabled, joined the Peace Corps or worked in a welfare office, she would understand that there are people in the world that have real, actual problems. Their problems aren't necessarily their relationships (although, their actual problems do affect their relationships), there problems include: not having enough money food or rent, dying from disease, not being educated, etc... In essence, their problems result from their inability to satisfy their basic human needs. If the movie has a scene where she starts doing volunteer work of ANY kind (picking up litter, assisting the disabled, etc...) I will get behind this movie. Those are worthwhile activities and a valid response to being depressed because you are upper-middle class. Making a silly movie about how you can't find a real job after college because you live in la-la land is not a valid response and only reinforces your foolish behavior.

(I know this sounds judgmental and harsh. However, I feel like at one point I was like her - my main concern were my relationships with the opposite sex and "finding who I was." However, my money and my mouth are in the same place - I practice what I preach).

I agree with what you say if we are talking about life, but art is different.

I haven't seen any of any Dunham's work, even though it is only a click away on youtube or netflix. For whatever reason, there is always something else I would rather watch more. But as consistently irritated as I am with the upper middle class complaining about white people problems, that doesn't mean that a movie about them can't have some insight into the human condition.

If I was to look at the protagonist of The Music Room, how is he any better? He didn't earn any of the wealth that he squanders on music and his petty competition with his neighbor, and yet it is hard not to feel something for him. And I would be hard pressed to describe that movie as anything less than great.

I personally enjoy the work of writer/directors like Anderson or Baumbach or Payne who have, so far, made movies from the point of view of modern sad white middle class people. But I would rather see their particular insights into worlds that they know than their best guess at a Color Purple sequel.

[BohemianGraham]

Originally Posted by Roninblues

Hitler was a good artist, just because you don't agree with that Jewish issue.

You seriously had to Godwin the Criterion thread?

[Show spoiler]I'm disappointed that the Criterion thread is no longer a safe-haven from the stuff that goes on in the other threads.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

...Twenty-seven days until May announcements...

Are you counting them for real?

[octagon]

Speaking of Rip Torn's junk, I just received The Man Who Fell to Earth I ordered from an Amazon reseller last week and 'like new' appears to have been a pretty fair appraisal.

I still don't know if it was worth forty bucks more than the Optimum but for $56 and change I'm glad enough to cross it off the wish list.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by slimdude

What is so special about Criterion releases anyway, that everybody is falling head over heels over, besides the tons of extra features they suppose to have? Do Criterion movies have exceptional A/V quality, than normal blu-ray releases? I've never bought one because there is not one Criterion blu-ray, nor DVD title that interests me.

There are many reasons and while I know this is mostly off subject I can maybe share my own with you.

Yes Criterion do offer nice bonus features and they are very different then the normal special features of other movies. They talk about the history of the movie, it's creator and the process of the story. Also another thing they do very well is care for restoration. Are they perfect? Some will tell you they are, others will still find things wrong with them but in general you can expect a well made restoration handled with care. When you consider the age of the movies they do releases some of them do come out as near perfection as possible. My own personal reason, they release movies that would not be handle by most studios. Rare movies, art house movies, movies that do not sell in great numbers cause to be honest they would not hold a lot of attraction for most people out there. As a example, I like the movie of Japanese director Yasujiro Ozu. Now without Criterion what would be the chances of his movies ever being released on DVD or Blu-ray? Probably from none to zero So for people like myself who enjoy the more main stream movies of Hollywood but still love watching different styles of movies and world cinema, Criterion is really a wonderful option that we would not have otherwise.

[Banned User]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Now without Criterion what would be the chances of his movies ever being released on DVD or Blu-ray? Probably from none to zero So for people like myself who enjoy the more main stream movies of Hollywood but still love watching different styles of movies and world cinema, Criterion is really a wonderful option that we would not have otherwise.

I have to agree 100%. Through exploring Criterion titles I've discovered some movies that I now consider my favorite movies of all time. My only complaint is their titles do not come with magnets.

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

They have not released The Rock, or Armageddon yet.

You sir will have to pay for my shirt that I just spilled coffee all over. I'll send the bill in the mail.

[georgec]

I rewatched bits of The Last Temptation of Christ last night. It's such an amazing movie. The last scene with

[Show spoiler]Judas and Jesus in the village is maybe one of my favorite dialogues in film. Keitel's performance is amazing, as is Dafoe's.

This is probably my most anticipated release of the year so far.