The Criterion Collection

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by Belloche

I understand what you're trying to say but I hate it when people try to say what is worthy of Criterion or not. Criterion is trying to put out great films, they're not trying to be elitist or film snobs. Back in the Laserdisc days they released loads of mainstream movies.(Halloween, King Kong, Taxi Driver, The Game) The reason they rarely release mainstream movies these days is because they can't get the rights to them since DVD took off. I don't see any division between Silence of the Lambs and The Seventh Seal coming from Criterion. I don't know why people insist on making one up.

Armageddon, great film?

[Belloche]

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

Armageddon, great film?

I'll admit that the Bay films are a bit of a head scratcher, but somebody out there was no doubt glad to own them.

[crey014]

There are two ways in looking at Michael Bay, I think.
(a) A cash cow for Criterion, easily acquiring a marketable director who makes marketable mainstream blockbuster films to help it pay the bills.
(b) A challenge to the idea of the Auteur theory (I KNOW, I also just laughed).

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by crey014

There are two ways in looking at Michael Bay, I think.
(a) A cash cow for Criterion, easily acquiring a marketable director who makes marketable mainstream blockbuster films to help it pay the bills.
(b) A challenge to the idea of the Auteur theory (I KNOW, I also just laughed).

He's an auteur alright, a "mindless, loud action movie" auteur.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by crey014

There are two ways in looking at Michael Bay, I think.
(a) A cash cow for Criterion, easily acquiring a marketable director who makes marketable mainstream blockbuster films to help it pay the bills.
(b) A challenge to the idea of the Auteur theory (I KNOW, I also just laughed).

Yeah, he is the auteur that sits back while guys with computers make his films for him. He is a King among directors people. He doesn't even make movies, he makes cartoons. He makes good cartoons, but never say Transformers is a movie, if it is 90% fake CGI.

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Yeah, he is the auteur that sits back while guys with computers make his films for him. He is a King among directors people. He doesn't even make movies, he makes cartoons. He makes good cartoons, but never say Transformers is a movie, if it is 90% fake CGI.

I don't think he makes "good" cartoons either. Trash is more like it.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

Yeah, he is the auteur that sits back while guys with computers make his films for him. He is a King among directors people. He doesn't even make movies, he makes cartoons. He makes good cartoons, but never say Transformers is a movie, if it is 90% fake CGI.

Who the hell do you think you are man??
Don't you know this is blu-ray.com, Transformers ****ing ROCKS!!!
Why don't you stick to your "smart" films that aren't even in English. You can enjoy reading your TV screen while I get hard watching 15 robots in macho fights and then I can knock one out over Megan Fox's sweat-dripping titties!!!






P.S. when's Star Wars out?

[SpiderBaby]

Blu-ray isn't just to make stupid "popcorn" movies for those zombie people who likes Transformers, Twilight, Watchmen (Who the hell heard of this really before the movie?) or Harry Potter because your T.V. or computer tells you to. It's crazy how stupid people are. "Oh I must like Twilight because other people like Twilight." "Oh I like Tranformers because it's all over my T.V., so I must like it." The same people say "I hate movies I have to read, hurts my little eyes!" or "Why don't this movie have a Disney star that is pushed in my face to make me like him?"

Get real people, open your eyes. Get off the Cell Phones and Twitters.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Belloche

I understand what you're trying to say but I hate it when people try to say what is worthy of Criterion or not. Criterion is trying to put out great films, they're not trying to be elitist or film snobs. Back in the Laserdisc days they released loads of mainstream movies.(Halloween, King Kong, Taxi Driver, The Game) The reason they rarely release mainstream movies these days is because they can't get the rights to them since DVD took off. I don't see any division between Silence of the Lambs and The Seventh Seal coming from Criterion. I don't know why people insist on making one up.

Sorry I didint mean to offend anyones film taste ( If I did I apologize), I guess what I was saying is the High Profile films generate cash so films like "Fishing With John" for example can be restored.

[Seretur]

You really shouldn't have put Watchmen in that group.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Seretur

You really shouldn't have put Watchmen in that group.

How come? It's not a good movie, at all, and isn't it not in the same group as the Twilight, Transformers, Watchmen, Star Trek, Harry Potter mess that are CGI filled movies that are based off of comics, campy t.v. shows, or children books?

[Deciazulado]

You get what you neeeeeeeeed

Gimme Shelter pre-order up

[Belloche]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Sorry I didint mean to offend anyones film taste ( If I did I apologize), I guess what I was saying is the High Profile films generate cash so films like "Fishing With John" for example can be restored.

No offence at all. I just thought someone had to take a stand for the Robocops and Spinal Taps of the collection They belong there too.

[Mr.White]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Sorry I didint mean to offend anyones film taste ( If I did I apologize), I guess what I was saying is the High Profile films generate cash so films like "Fishing With John" for example can be restored.

I actually liked Fishing With John, cool guests, Willem Dafore,Matt Dillon,Tom Wait,Jim Jamusch, and the Dennis Hopper 2 parter. Sadly my so-called friend "borrowed" my Criterion Collection DVD and I never saw him or my DVD ever again.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Belloche

No offence at all. I just thought someone had to take a stand for the Robocops and Spinal Taps of the collection They belong there too.

Spinal Tap is not high profile....you would be amazed at the number of people that have no clue what the film is. Now Robocop falls in with the more High Profile films.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

How come? It's not a good movie, at all, and isn't it not in the same group as the Twilight, Transformers, Watchmen, Star Trek, Harry Potter mess that are CGI filled movies that are based off of comics, campy t.v. shows, or children books?

I can enjoy a CGI filled mess if I'm in the right mood. Bergman is my favorite, but I'm not always in the mood to sit through his dark, depressing films. Same with Rohmer, Kieslowski, Godard, Truffaut, etc... Watchmen, I thought, was better than a lot of the CGI junk (until the awful last act, but then again I don't think the comic is as grand as other people think). Twilight is one of the worst recent movies I've seen. And I enjoy Harry Potter for what it is.

What this post has to do with Criterion, I have no idea. LOL.

[ccfixx]

Pro-b, is there any chance that we're gonna be seeing your review for any of the Monterey Pop stuff before next week's release date? Thanks.

CC

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by retablo

I can enjoy a CGI filled mess if I'm in the right mood. Bergman is my favorite, but I'm not always in the mood to sit through his dark, depressing films. Same with Rohmer, Kieslowski, Godard, Truffaut, etc... Watchmen, I thought, was better than a lot of the CGI junk (until the awful last act, but then again I don't think the comic is as grand as other people think). Twilight is one of the worst recent movies I've seen. And I enjoy Harry Potter for what it is.

What this post has to do with Criterion, I have no idea. LOL.

Hey, I don't watch serious films all the time either. What I also watch is comedy films and horror like Mario Bava films. That stuff also doesn't need CGI to be good.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

How come? It's not a good movie, at all, and isn't it not in the same group as the Twilight, Transformers, Watchmen, Star Trek, Harry Potter mess that are CGI filled movies that are based off of comics, campy t.v. shows, or children books?

I don't mind the popcorn put your brain on the side movies, I find them to be an escape, a way for me to relax. I am not so ready to include Watchmen in that category however. It's a movie that I need to be in the mood to watch, like Seventh Seal or Kagemusha or many of the other Criterion releases I have. I love the Star Wars or Indy more because they are a wonderful way for me to relax, to escape. It's more difficult to escape with Akira Kurosawa even if he is one of my favorite director.

I guess I started this whole thing with my question on Micheal Bay. I just found it very weird that they would put Armaggedon as a Criterion release, it's not a very good movie from the start and it kind of make's it almost an insult to the other directors on this list. Micheal Bay while serving is purpose in entertaiment too many fans does not belong with the Criterion directors IMO

[Kevtronn]

Another thing to consider is that by releasing these "mainstream" films (such as Armaggedon, Royal Tenenbaums, Curious Case of Benjamin Button), Criterion gets to put out their name to audiences that normally would never see it because you can buy these films in retail stores that never sell Criterion films. Just maybe, some of these buyers will get involved with the Criterion Collection afterwards. Or...it is all for the money