The Criterion Collection

[octagon]

Originally Posted by White Dang

A lot of you guys crack me up. Why don't you watch the movie...then buy what you like??

I've seen over half the collection and 90% of the ones on Blu-ray. Then I don't have to come here asking for advice when a sale come around. But to each his own lol.

Keep an eye on your inbox. A coupon for One Free Internet should be showing up anytime now.

[White Dang]

One free library is nice too.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

Where do you watch them at?

AT HuluPlus, most often--For me, it's worth the money just to get daily Daily Show updates, but when you have a streaming collection that includes most of their Eclipse and as-yet-unupgraded DVD titles as well, plus a few they haven't gotten around to disking yet, $7.99 a month comes in pretty all-fired cheaper than any monthly deal Barnes & Noble has yet offered.
(Not to mention, a better anime selection than anything Crunchyroll has to offer for $7.99/mo., but that's off the subject.)
The rest of their non-Criterion movie collection is a sad joke, unfortunately, but if you want, in your transitional devotion, to tell yourself that you're loyally paying $7.99/mo for The Criterion Channel, you won't be far off the mark. One wonders why Hulu hasn't simply spun it off as its own service by now.

Normally, the glories of blind-buying is traditionally answered with "So get mail-Netflix, already, sheesh! ", but, of course, we know about Hulu wooing Criterion away from Netflix, so have to adjust catchphrases accordingly.

As for why everyone blind-buys Criterion, or feels they "have" to...there are amazing depths to which we would sink when we feel someone "lifts us up" with our own infatuation to them, even if they never return it.
In this case, people who've never seen Kurosawa or Bergman in their lives buy a title to be curious about it, find something good by accident, and say, "More, more, Criterion, you have my devotion, TEACH me! ", and believe that every $29.95 they spend is an act of cult loyalty that spiritually betters themselves by it.
Me, OTOH, I end up feeling $21.96 worse, if I haven't rented it ahead of time, and it's something artsy-fartsy enough to bite me in the behind for it. My exposure to the more obscure waters of the Criterion collection was through their being featured on "The Story of Film" on Instant Netflix (also for "free"); there I could at least get some excerpts and catalog descriptions, as ignorance of the film is no excuse.

[White Dang]

I would definitely agree.

IMO people who blind buy loads of the Criterion Collection are either foolish spenders or they just have the exact taste as the collection and could explain their cinematic tastes by saying "The Criterion Collection."

[Jett Rink]

Originally Posted by White Dang

I would definitely agree.

IMO people who blind buy loads of the Criterion Collection are either foolish spenders or they just have the exact taste as the collection and could explain their cinematic tastes by saying "The Criterion Collection."

I have to agree with you, although I am not bashing people who buy every Criterion out there. As others here have said, screen the movie first at a library for free, then buy it if you love it.

[MitchA17]

Originally Posted by rockstarnati

La Haine is such a great film. One of my all-time favorites. I'm contemplating buying the blu-ray (again). Can't decide between that or a blind buy.

I LOVE La Haine. I describe it to friends as Do the Right Thing meets Dazed and Confused.

[jayj15]

Originally Posted by JohnWayne

Where do you watch them at?

Turner Classic Movies shows many of them as well. They had "400 Blows", and "Purple Noon" a while back. There's nothing wrong with watching a film before buying it to see if you like it. At 40 bucks a film, I have to know.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by brandon_260

I liked it a fair bit. Almost certainly the weakest Bergman I've seen, and some of the humor likely went over my head because I've still yet to see 8 1/2, but there are absolutely worse ways to spend 80 minutes. Definitely different than the Bergman I'm used to, but if Criterion ever gives it a physical release, I'll be picking it up.

Roger Ebert, OTOH, put it on his list of All-Time Worst movies for the Medveds, saying that "it took one of the world's best directors to make one of the world's worst comedies":
In his 1976 review for The Magic Flute, Ebert opens by saying that "It's been ten years since Bergman made a comedy (All These Women), and 20 years since he made a good one (Smiles of a Summer Night)."

Originally Posted by White Dang

IMO people who blind buy loads of the Criterion Collection are either foolish spenders or they just have the exact taste as the collection and could explain their cinematic tastes by saying "The Criterion Collection."

Remember, nobody joins a cult because somebody dangled a hypnotist's watch in front of their eyes and "brainwashed" them--They joined voluntarily, because they had their first virgin taste of spiritual/intellectual enlightenment, attached it to a name to credit instead of an idea, put all their identity behind believing that that someone higher above them had All The Answers, and their own poor lost, misspent selves didn't.
That's particularly visible when we have new fans wanting to educate themselves above their poor station, and saying "I want to see more Criterion movies...I bought 'Following' because Chris Nolan directed it!" (And I should know messiahs, I've followed a few!)

And if you want to sell ME on the idea of spending huge amounts of my money to track down a dreary copy of Marienbad to "enlighten" myself, rather than simply renting it, librarying it or Hulu'ing it when I have a spare weekend, fine, I'll take it under advisement, just don't do it when I'm at the airports.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by EricJ

And if you want to sell ME on the idea of spending huge amounts of my money to track down a dreary copy of Marienbad to "enlighten" myself, rather than simply renting it, librarying it or Hulu'ing it when I have a spare weekend, fine, I'll take it under advisement, just don't do it when I'm at the airports.

Who exactly has shown any interest whatsoever in how YOU spend your money?

Please, be specific.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by brandon_260

Seen it before? You're in for such a treat. While Le fils is their masterpiece, the Dardennes truly honed in on their talent with this one.

First viewing.

Initially, it felt like the Dardennes repeating themselves, only this time with an extremely sympathetic lead (Rosetta is still my favorite Dardennes'). But eventually it became apparent that they fully thought out the world and characters they were attempting to explore. My mother helps manage an orphanage in Juarez, Mexico, so often I will hear very painful backstories of children who have been abused, joined gangs and/or homeless. All I can say is that the Dardennes clearly have an entry point into what a neglected child feels.

My biggest issue with the film is the full orchestra tragic score (which I think is only briefly used 3 times). Ugh, it's so overdone and really added nothing to my experience. I was already feeling what the Dardennes wanted me to feel, there's no need to reinforce it with a mawkish number....

That aside, I will be rearranging my top 20 of 2012 list.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by octagon

Who exactly has shown any interest whatsoever in how YOU spend your money?

Please, be specific.

The amount of money I have to spend monthly on hard-disks, most other people can't detect with the naked eye, so, thankfully, no one ftm.
(I get most of my disks through free Amazon GC's once every month or so, just that they're never around when "Modern Times" or "Topsy Turvy" hits a low price.)

It's just that we know that all these poor victims are just going to come back to the street months later, posting their "How many cases did you build for your collection?", and "How often do you clean out your collection?", and "How did you celebrate when your collection hit 1000+?" threads--Believing compulsive hoarding to be normal human behavior if it's for a good cause and that they're better, finer, more loyal and enthusiastic people for it.
Why not be able to solve TWO problems instead of one?

[Jett Rink]

Originally Posted by EricJ

The amount of money I have to spend monthly on hard-disks, most other people can't detect with the naked eye, so, thankfully, no one ftm.
(I get most of my disks through free Amazon GC's once every month or so, just that they're never around when "Modern Times" or "Topsy Turvy" hits a low price.)

It's just that we know that all these poor victims are just going to come back to the street months later, posting their "How many cases did you build for your collection?", and "How often do you clean out your collection?", and "How did you celebrate when your collection hit 1000+?" threads--Believing compulsive hoarding to be normal human behavior if it's for a good cause and that they're better, finer, more loyal and enthusiastic people for it.
Why not be able to solve TWO problems instead of one?

+1. I like the cut of your jib.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by EricJ

Why not be able to solve TWO problems instead of one?

You spelled imagine wrong.

[brandon_260]

Originally Posted by EricJ

Roger Ebert, OTOH, put it on his list of All-Time Worst movies for the Medveds, saying that "it took one of the world's best directors to make one of the world's worst comedies":
In his 1976 review for The Magic Flute, Ebert opens by saying that "It's been ten years since Bergman made a comedy (All These Women), and 20 years since he made a good one (Smiles of a Summer Night)."

After watching the film, I was briefly looking at some reactions, and they were almost all incredibly negative. I'm going to take a look at the Ebert review tomorrow. I think some of the slapstick comedy used in the film was pretty effective, like Bergman paying tribute to Chaplin and the likes.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

First viewing.

Initially, it felt like the Dardennes repeating themselves, only this time with an extremely sympathetic lead (Rosetta is still my favorite Dardennes'). But eventually it became apparent that they fully thought out the world and characters they were attempting to explore. My mother helps manage an orphanage in Juarez, Mexico, so often I will hear very painful backstories of children who have been abused, joined gangs and/or homeless. All I can say is that the Dardennes clearly have an entry point into what a neglected child feels.

My biggest issue with the film is the full orchestra tragic score (which I think is only briefly used 3 times). Ugh, it's so overdone and really added nothing to my experience. I was already feeling what the Dardennes wanted me to feel, there's no need to reinforce it with a mawkish number....

That aside, I will be rearranging my top 20 of 2012 list.

Really glad this was your reaction to the film. The Dardennes really make some hard hitting stuff, and while this topic isn't necessarily that personal to me, it still has a jarring effect on me every time I watch it. The conversation with Kent Jones on the Criterion release is a great, lengthy piece that I recommend getting around to.

[deepbreathsanddeath]

Originally Posted by White Dang

A lot of you guys crack me up. Why don't you watch the movie...then buy what you like??

I've seen over half the collection and 90% of the ones on Blu-ray. Then I don't have to come here asking for advice when a sale come around. But to each his own lol.

I don't see the big deal. If you buy Criterions during the sales and end up disliking it, you can re-sell them for what you originally payed when a sale isn't on and it'll easily sell.

Plus, people pay (at least here in Australia) $12-$20+ per ticket in the cinema on movies they haven't seen. Then if they enjoy it, they'll buy it on blu-ray when it comes out but nobody judges them because going to the cinema is "different". Because its an experience you cannot have anywhere else really. That's true but you're still blind buying and spending twice as much if you end up enjoying it and wanting to own it.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by brandon_260

Really glad this was your reaction to the film. The Dardennes really make some hard hitting stuff, and while this topic isn't necessarily that personal to me, it still has a jarring effect on me every time I watch it. The conversation with Kent Jones on the Criterion release is a great, lengthy piece that I recommend getting around to.

I've read a few Kent Jones reviews, and he is indeed a very knowledgeable critic. I will need to see that conversation immediately.

[White Dang]

Originally Posted by deepbreathsanddeath

Plus, people pay (at least here in Australia) $12-$20+ per ticket in the cinema on movies they haven't seen. Then if they enjoy it, they'll buy it on blu-ray when it comes out but nobody judges them because going to the cinema is "different". That's true but you're still blind buying and spending twice as much if you end up enjoying it and wanting to own it.

There's really no big deal. Just an observation and opinion combination.

Anyway, watching a film in a cinema for $6-12 (America) because the trailers have drawn you in is a big difference from blind buying movies you have little idea about for $15-25 because they are Criterion.

[RiFiFi1955]

Originally Posted by White Dang

There's really no big deal. Just an observation and opinion combination.

Anyway, watching a film in a cinema for $6-12 (America) because the trailers have drawn you in is a big difference from blind buying movies you have little idea about for $15-25 because they are Criterion.

I wish $6 US dollars would cover it, even at the matinee I'm spending $9.50.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by deepbreathsanddeath

I just watched Citizen Kane for the first time. Everything about it was so ahead of its time. The only part that felt dated to me was the narration during the beginning. While I love old films, that overly loud monotone narration commonly found in movies from that time period has never done it for me and always manages to take me out of the experience.

It may help to understand that the style of narration for that opening "newsreel" sequence was actually Orson Welles' wicked parody of the typical newsreels of the era, both in its verbal phrasing and vocal inflections. A mockumentary before they became fashionable. Moreover, the placement of it near the beginning of the film (right after the death of Kane) is another playful move by Welles to mess with the minds of audience members who came in late (like he'd done with his radio production of "War of the Worlds"). At that time a typical movie theatre would run a few shorts before the main feature, including a newsreel. People coming in late would think that the newsreel was still running so it would be more of a shock when the film cuts to the screening room.

And yeah, Welles' range of acting is really amazing in that film.

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

I haven't seen The Kid Brother, but can vouch for the greatness of Safety Last! In addition to being hilarious, the film is so iconic that it is worth seeing so that you can pick up on all the references made to it in other movies. I hope to pick it up in July, if the budget is willing (I just made a wish list for the sale, and it has 24 titles on it so far).

SAFETY LAST is fun, especially with a good-sized, appreciative audience, and the clock sequence is Lloyd at his best, but I liked THE KID BROTHER better overall, and it may be my favorite of all Lloyd's features. Lloyd's character is more of a sympathetic underdog, for one, and the scene with the monkey wearing the shoes and Lloyd hearing footsteps is really hysterical (again, even more so with a good audience).