Scanners (1981)

[master_8ball]

Glad I didn't import... This will sit nicely next to Videodrome my only other Criterion.

[Partyslammer]

Originally Posted by frogmeat69

The more I look at the cover art, the more I like it. But it just seems like there's a lot of folks here that will never be happy, no matter what. Favorite movie of all time being released with perfect PQ and AQ scores, every extra and commentary known and unknown to mankind, plus the lead actor will personally deliver it to your doorstep? No way am I accepting that, it's in an eco case!!! etc., etc......

I think you're overstating things here. Speaking for myself and likely a overwhelming number of others that have voiced similar negative opinions about the cover art, it's no deal breaker by any stretch. It is an aspect (packaging) of the release that people can and will comment on but so what? Like I mentioned in my comments about Criterion's hit and miss original art on their releases, there's been a few, notably the art for Gojira/Godzilla which is absolutely terrible but I still bought the release on day one and certainly enjoy all aspects of the movie, transfer, extras, etc.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by musicfann

ENCORE has been playing the heck out of THE DEAD ZONE, in HD...can't wait for this one, as well !

that's an outstanding film... better than the book, better than SCANNERS as well... would love to see a blu release from either Paramount or Criterion..

[Mr.Twinks]

Looking forward to having this movie!

[captainjoe]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

that's an outstanding film... better than the book, better than SCANNERS as well... would love to see a blu release from either Paramount or Criterion..

I've got 50 pages left in The Dead Zone and I completely agree that the movie is better. I mean, I'm really enjoying the book and all but the movie tells the story better I think.

[JoeDeM]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

that's an outstanding film... better than the book, better than SCANNERS as well... would love to see a blu release from either Paramount or Criterion..

I agree, would love to see Criterion release this. I'm also surprised Crash is so low on everyone's list, I thought it would also make a great Criterion release.

[cakefactory]

Crash has no "awesome gore" and no sci-fi/horror elements really so it doesn't appeal to many horror fans and the sexuality of it sickens a ton of other people (particularly the thigh scar scene and, for some people, the man-on-man action!) and it's just so incredibly icy. It also was one of the very few movies to be released as NC-17 so the initial audience for it was tiny since it couldn't play in very many theaters at all and when it came out on video some places wouldn't carry it.

I remember when it came out there was some really severe backlash from a lot of corners that basically said that watching the movie made them feel like they were being violated. I thought it was really funny when someone said almost the same thing about the Haggis "Crash," partly cause I also hated it and partly cause of how closely it mirrored sincere reactions to the Cronenberg one!

It has always had a small contingent of people who consider it Cronenberg's masterpiece, such as the BBC's Mark Kermode, but it's probably his least accessible movie. When you're talking about the guy who made stuff like Videodrome and Naked Lunch, that's REALLY saying something.

I thing it's about time to rewatch it, I saw it when I was about 18 years old (this was like, 2003, so I watched a garbagey little AVI I downloaded off Kazaa or something!) and didn't have much of a reaction to it then and I barely remember it. I've just seen/heard a ton of discussion on it in the years since which has me convinced it probably IS one of his very best movies.

Criterion did release a laserdisc, as you are probably aware. It would be great if they could release it on bluray, the commentary didn't make it to the DVD.

[x melio x]

I enjoy Videodrome even though it's a little out there. I have never seen Scanners though. It is a good watch? Anything out here mainstream like it? I enjoy all types of cinema.

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by Partyslammer

Like I mentioned in my comments about Criterion's hit and miss original art on their releases, there's been a few, notably the art for Gojira/Godzilla which is absolutely terrible but I still bought the release on day one and certainly enjoy all aspects of the movie, transfer, extras, etc.

Sorry, but Bill Sienkiewicz has never produced a "terrible" piece of artwork in his life. Yes, I'm aware that his conception of Godzilla incorporated elements of the Millennium design, rather than being a strictly 1954 Godzilla, and that bothers some fans...but to say that the art itself is "terrible" is unfair.

[neoz]

Originally Posted by master_8ball

Glad I didn't import... This will sit nicely next to Videodrome my only other Criterion.

I imported the steelbook because it looks cool. But I knew that Criterion was releasing which I knew I was going to get as well.

[madlost1]

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

Sorry, but Bill Sienkiewicz has never produced a "terrible" piece of artwork in his life. Yes, I'm aware that his conception of Godzilla incorporated elements of the Millennium design, rather than being a strictly 1954 Godzilla, and that bothers some fans...but to say that the art itself is "terrible" is unfair.

As a huge Godzilla fan I have to say that I had no problem with the depiction of Godzilla on the cover. The cover art for that release is absolutely stunning.

[jlk5844]

Thank heavens I'm not the only one who thought the Godzilla artwork was gorgeous.

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

Thank heavens I'm not the only one who thought the Godzilla artwork was gorgeous.

I'm right there with you. Of course, I may be biased, as I've been a fan of Sienkiewicz's work since the '80s. But objectively, I just think it's a great depiction of Godzilla. No, it's not strictly adherent to the 1954 design...yes, it takes a great deal of inspiration from later designs...but ultimately, it evokes the dark and ominous tone that is very much the soul of the original film. It depicts Godzilla as a force of sudden and unstoppable destruction, and does so very effectively. As such, I'm not going to pick it apart and complain about the spines on his back being wrong for 1954, or anything like that. I don't care. It's a beautiful piece of art, and I feel that people have taken it too literally.

And for what it's worth, I also like the Scanners cover art.

[RandyK]

It'd be awesome if there was a pop up of an exploding head in the outer case.

[Partyslammer]

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

I'm right there with you. Of course, I may be biased, as I've been a fan of Sienkiewicz's work since the '80s. But objectively, I just think it's a great depiction of Godzilla. No, it's not strictly adherent to the 1954 design...yes, it takes a great deal of inspiration from later designs...but ultimately, it evokes the dark and ominous tone that is very much the soul of the original film. It depicts Godzilla as a force of sudden and unstoppable destruction, and does so very effectively. As such, I'm not going to pick it apart and complain about the spines on his back being wrong for 1954, or anything like that. I don't care. It's a beautiful piece of art, and I feel that people have taken it too literally.

And for what it's worth, I also like the Scanners cover art.

I like(d) Sienkiewicz back when he was doing Neal Adams style better than Adams on Marvel comics like Moon Knight and still think he's grown to be a great artist. But I think he was a totally inappropriate choice from the get-go for this job and while I agree that it's *technically* a good piece, it does little to evoke the style, themes and period of the film itself. I will concede that is boils down to individual tastes but I will simply conclude that I had a very negative reaction to the art and packaging to the point I did my own box art using a painting by Yuji Kaida for a regular plastic case:



Versus

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Partyslammer

I like(d) Sienkiewicz back when he was doing Neal Adams style better than Adams on Marvel comics like Moon Knight and still think he's grown to be a great artist. But I think he was a totally inappropriate choice from the get-go for this job and while I agree that it's *technically* a good piece, it does little to evoke the style, themes and period of the film itself. I will concede that is boils down to individual tastes but I will simply conclude that I had a very negative reaction to the art and packaging to the point I did my own box art using a painting by Yuji Kaida for a regular plastic case:

[Show spoiler]

Versus

[Show spoiler]

The bottom artwork is far better imo.

[thelittleprince]

Originally Posted by x melio x

I enjoy Videodrome even though it's a little out there. I have never seen Scanners though. It is a good watch? Anything out here mainstream like it? I enjoy all types of cinema.

I actually prefer Scanners over Videodrome, personally, although I love both films. Classic Cronenberg!

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by Partyslammer

I like(d) Sienkiewicz back when he was doing Neal Adams style better than Adams on Marvel comics like Moon Knight and still think he's grown to be a great artist. But I think he was a totally inappropriate choice from the get-go for this job and while I agree that it's *technically* a good piece, it does little to evoke the style, themes and period of the film itself. I will concede that is boils down to individual tastes but I will simply conclude that I had a very negative reaction to the art and packaging to the point I did my own box art using a painting by Yuji Kaida for a regular plastic case:

[Show spoiler]

Versus

[Show spoiler]

Still gotta side with Bill, though I do like the Yuji Kaida painting. The latter is more literal...the former, more evocative. While you can disagree, I think the actual cover does more to evoke the themes of the film than the Kaida painting, which is more just a literal interpretation of Godzilla and a scenario from the film. I don't see that it "evokes the style, themes, and period," as you put it, at all. Of course, every fan will have his or her own opinion. I've just never seen the argument against Sienkiewicz's art as being particularly valid, as it seems to just boil down to, "He didn't adhere slavishly to the 1954 design." And while I can understand objecting to it on those grounds as a purist, I absolutely cannot understand calling it terrible on those grounds.

Still, it's a nice custom. But what's with the spine number being where the year should be?

[cakefactory]

The criterion godzilla cover is fine though I don't really know how I feel about the pop-up book aspect. Most of their pictures are a great combination of images from the movie with themes of the movie and the Godzilla one is no different. It may be the "wrong" Godzilla and as a diehard nerd that owns every single godzilla movie in at least one format I have to say I do not care, at all.

That second painting is kind of amusing on its own merits but it's very...blunt and his head looks like some kind of silly comic book rendition that is trying to make him look badass. Preferring that would be like preferring a big gory pink head-explosion over the current scanners cover!

[Race Bannon]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

Looks like a nice release, although I wish there was a Cronenberg commentary track, as his are always a real pleasure to listen to.

How can they not include a commentary track? That's one of my favorite things about a high quality release.

No sale.